40
   

The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie

 
 
giujohn
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 29 Dec, 2014 08:52 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
The racial segregation of the American south (particularly during the 1940's, 50's and 60's...was completely initiated and maintained by far-right conservatives.


Uh, yeah...they were called DEMOCRATS.

Oh...I see this has already been covered quite well...never mind.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 29 Dec, 2014 09:19 pm
Quote:
Liberals' Use of Black People


Quote:
Liberals often have demeaning attitudes toward blacks. When Secretary of State John Kerry was a U.S. senator, in a statement about so many blacks being in prison, he said, "That's unacceptable, but it's not their fault." Would Kerry also say that white prison inmates are also faultless? Johns Hopkins University sociologist Andrew Cherlin told us: "It has yet to be shown that the absence of a father was directly responsible for any of the supposed deficiencies of broken homes. ... (The problem) is not the lack of male presence but the lack of male income." The liberal vision is that fathers and husbands can be replaced by a welfare check.

Liberals desperately need blacks. If the Democratic Party lost just 30 percent of the black vote, it would mean the end of the liberal agenda. That means blacks must be kept in a perpetual state of grievance in order to keep them as a one-party people in a two-party system. When black Americans finally realize how much liberals have used them, I'm betting they will be the nation's most conservative people. Who else has been harmed as much by liberalism's vision and agenda?


The author is black.

http://www.creators.com/conservative/walter-williams/liberals-use-of-black-people.html
giujohn
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 29 Dec, 2014 10:02 pm
@coldjoint,
Quote:
When black Americans finally realize how much liberals have used them, I'm betting they will be the nation's most conservative people.


I doubt it seriously. And here is the reason why:
Quote:
The liberal vision is that fathers and husbands can be replaced by a welfare check.


In order to be a conservative you have to eschew welfare.

Young urban blacks have learned to be shiftless and expect welfare at their momma's knee. It's now generational. To them, there is no shame in being this way. They do not want to assimilate into society. They want to whine like spoiled children. I say **** em. They get what they deserve. I have little sympathy nor tolerance for bratty children. If they are too stupid to figure it out, oh ******* well.
hawkeye10
 
  3  
Reply Mon 29 Dec, 2014 10:09 pm
@giujohn,
Quote:
In order to be a conservative you have to eschew welfare.

I dont think that is true...conservatives often believe in welfare as medicine, but not diet.
giujohn
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 29 Dec, 2014 10:17 pm
@hawkeye10,
Conservatives certainly do not view welfare as a way of life. Welfare was brought to you by liberal democrats such as FDR and LBJ. They love to operate as social engineers to justify their existance. It is the major plank in their platform...not so the conservative.


This is what I was taught in Polysci...


What is the Conservative View on the Welfare State?



So what is the difference between conservatives, liberals, and progressives when it comes to the Welfare State? Since the New Deal Act of 1935, the political structure that provides for the welfare of its people referred to The Welfare State has been hotly debated. What I present here are some of my notes from Dr. Laura Curran’s Social Welfare Policy lectures at Rutgers University, summer 2012. As she observes, much of the vitriol results from differing beliefs and commitments concerning how political and economic institutions should interact or not. This post seeks to clarify some of the basic commitments and values that underpin conservative ideology and its social welfare policy. The same will be provided for liberal democratic, and the progressive ideologies in posts 2 and 3.

So what does the conservative view include? The central principle of American conservative political thought is the belief that human well being is best advanced through personal responsibility and private institutions. That is, the Conservative social philosophy is one that argues from three commitments: the morality of personal responsibility, the ideology of individualism, and a laissez-faire political economy.

The ideology of Individualism values the individual more than rather than collective interests and asserts that the collective interest is best served when all individuals seek their own interests. Individualism asserts that each person is ultimately responsible for his or her own fate. Self-reliant persons will be rewarded with material success, and those who fail in life do so because of personal inadequacies of one kind or another.

Laissez Faire political economy literally means “to let do,” and this economic commitment is a corollary of individualism in that it suggests that society functions best when people are free to pursue their self interest, particularly their economic freedom without state interference. Laissez faire economics has its origins in Adam Smith’s writings from around the time of the American Revolution. He is heralded by many as the godfather of American capitalism. In the Wealth of Nations, Smith talked about the “Invisible Hand” that is at work in the marketplace and which allows everyone to pursue their self-interest through economic competition. Conservatives argue that competitive, unregulated capitalism is the best means of economic growth, overall prosperity and therefore the reduction of poverty. In this way, corporate growth creates job growth and thus reduces poverty. Ronald Regan captured the essence of the conservative ideology when he said “I’ve always said that the best thing government can do is nothing,” and this is because conservatives see government action as a hindrance to individual and family well-being.

Conservatives construct social issues such as homelessness, poverty, drug use, and crime as individual and family deficiencies. So for example, homeless are homeless because they have made poor family and individual choices, and they have done so because of their own deficiencies. In this sense, homelessness is the result of refusing to make better choices. In this way, poor persons, drug users, and criminals are cast as morally irresponsible.

Conservative commitments to individual moral responsibility, the ideology of individualism, and laissez faire economics lead to constructing social issues as what results from individual and family moral failure. As a result, they advocate social welfare policies that encourage free markets and residual models. Conservatives are not fond of government intervention. Instead, they believe social welfare spending should limited because government welfare programs encourage moral deficiencies such as laziness and sap individual initiative. Alternatively, free market capitalism should be allowed to accomplish what it does best: increase and expand capital and wealth, which is the best security against poverty. Conservatives favor a residual model of social welfare. That is, social welfare should be provided through non-governmental means and private institutions, meaning institutions outside of government such as family, voluntary charities funded by non- governmental means, and religious organizations. Programs for the poor are a necessary evil, and should be kept as small as possible.

Some conservatives, however, – the religious right or cultural or social conservatives – do support and call for numerous government interventions. While they remain opposed to economic interventions, they call for government interventions to restrict abortion, gay marriage, and certain religious and speech freedoms.

Against this backdrop, conservative ideology favors four policy principles: selectivity, privatization, devolution, reciprocity/responsibility.

Conservatives favor selective social welfare programs. This means they want to focus public benefits on those with the fewest resources. If government aid is going to be available, it should be limited to the worst off in society. Thus, means tested programs (you have to qualify for them – that is, not make more than X amount of dollars, not have more than X children, work X amount of hours while receiving benefits, etc.) should replace all universal ones (such as medicare, where once you turn a certain age, it doesn’t matter how much you make or don’t make, how many children you have or don’t have, or how much you work or don’t work, you qualify for the benefit).

Conservatives attempt to reduce government intervention by putting placing the responsibility of public welfare in the hands of the non-governmental institutions such as private, voluntary organizations or commercial profit-seeking institutions. School vouchers, in which public funds would be used to support children at private schools, is a good example of this.

Devolution is another conservative principle. Also known as decentralization, devolution argues for removing power and control from the federal government and instead placing it in state and local hands. States should discern what is best for them and thus cut down on big Washington bureaucracy. TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families), for instance, operates on a state by state level. Making TANF benefits available at the state level rather than at the Federal level allows each state latitude in defining their programs. For instance, each state decides how much money they want to spend, and different states end up doing very different things with their programs. The idea is that the federal government in Washington is way too out of touch with citizens in Hern, Texas to know what they need. Critics argue that programs with smaller federal oversight almost unilaterally provide fewer benefits to their citizens.

Finally, conservatives argue that if you receive assistance, you should give something back. This is the principle of responsible reciprocity. Citizens are not entitled to state benefits. A nice example of this was Clinton’s PRWORA (Personal Responsibility Work Opportunity Reform Act) reform, which mandated that in order to receive social welfare benefits, the recipient had to work. In this way, recipients reciprocated in a responsible way.

What have I missed or misconstrued? Thoughts welcome…




Share this:

Twitter1
Facebook3
Google
LinkedIn









What is a Liberal? And What is the Liberal View on Social Welfare?In "Macro"

What is a Leftist or a Progressive? What is the Leftist/ Progressive View on Social Welfare?In "Macro"

Maybe We Should Endorse Prayer In Schools: One Christian Social Worker's PerspectiveIn "Macro"

Tags: capitalism, Conservative, Democrat, Ideology, Individualism, Liberal, Progressive, Social Welfare Policy, Welfare State



What's your opinion?


Enter your comment here...


hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Dec, 2014 10:46 pm
@giujohn,
And yet we spend $250 per citizen on food stamps and approaching if not passing $1500 per citizen on medicaid per year. That works out to about $3000 per employed person per year being spent on just these two welfare programs alone. This is not sustainable.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Dec, 2014 11:14 pm
@hawkeye10,
What's each citizen's share of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars that cost $1.7 Trillion? That's whats so ******* unsustainable and your little girlfriends want new war in Syria, Iran and Iraq.
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Dec, 2014 11:19 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:

What's each citizen's share of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars that cost $1.7 Trillion? That's whats so ******* unsustainable and your little girlfriends want new war in Syria, Iran and Iraq.
presumably we dont keep doing that....the food stamps and medical costs continue as far as the eye can see, likely they will also continue to escalate much faster than inflation.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 Dec, 2014 11:25 pm
@hawkeye10,
Hawkeye, compare just the cost of these screwed up wars to "welfare" budgets. Welfare isn't a fraction. Plus the food stamp program directly help our farmers.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B5_KApGCIAAuV_J.jpg


Nearly 1 Million Vets Face Food Stamps Cut
221 comments
commissary checkout 428x285
Military.com Oct 29, 2013 | by Richard Sisk

About 900,000 veterans and 5,000 active duty troops face cuts in their food stamp benefits beginning Thursday as $5 billion is automatically trimmed from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) program for low-income families.

"The coming benefit cut will reduce SNAP benefits, which are already modest, for all households by 7 percent on average, or about $10 per person per month," according to an analysis by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

"Nationwide, in any given month, a total of 900,000 veterans nationwide lived in households that relied on SNAP to provide food for their families in 2011," according to an analysis of census data, the Center's report said.

The SNAP program received a boost under the 2009 Recovery Act, or stimulus bill aimed at lifting the nation out of recession, but that temporary increase will expire Thursday as Congress continues to debate a new farm bill which would separate farm subsidies from food stamp benefits.

In addition to the 900,000 veterans, the cut in SNAP benefits would impact about 5,000 military families that currently receive food stamps, mostly from the junior enlisted ranks, according to the Defense Department.

A Department of Agriculture report last year showed that more than 5,000 of the total of 48 million Americans receiving SNAP benefits listed their employment status as "active duty military," Pentagon officials said.

The SNAP program currently costs about $80 billion per year and provides food aid to 14 percent of all U.S. households, or about 48 million people.

Thousands of veterans from every state would be affected by the food stamp cuts, ranging from the 109,500 in Florida and 105,700 in Texas in the SNAP program, to the 2,200 in North Dakota, according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

Of the active duty troops, "military members who receive SNAP tend to be made up of members in junior pay grades with larger than average household sizes," Navy Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen, a Defense Department spokesman, said in August in commenting on the potential for benefit cuts

"Military members normally ‘promote out' of the need for additional subsistence benefits, due to the corresponding raises in basic pay and other allowances as one moves to a higher pay grade," Christensen said in an e-mail statement.

"It's a small population but it's a vulnerable population," Joye Raezer, executive director of the National Military Families Association, said of the active duty military families receiving food stamps.
Related Topics
Veterans Assistance Veterans Richard Sisk
© Copyright 2014 Military.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 12:15 am

NY State Trooper Threatens Driver Recording Stop: ‘I’ll Find a Way for the DA’s Office to Arrest You’

An irritated cop threatens man for recording him.


December 26, 2014 |


A New York State Trooper, annoyed that a motorist was recording their interactions, threatened to “find a way to arrest” him during a recent traffic stop.

In the video recorded by John Houghtaling, the trooper — identified as Officer Rosenblatt — walks up to the car and immediately holds his hand up to block the view of his face from the camera.

“Put the phone down,” The trooper tells Houghtaling, who asks the officer “why?” adding, “Am I not allowed to record, officer?”

After asking the trooper for his badge number, Houghtaling asks, “Am I being detained?”

The officer claims he stopped the car for a traffic violation and requests Houghtailing’s license and registration, before once again complaining about being filmed and threatening Houghtaling.

“How about if I see you post this on Youtube, I’ll find a way for the D.A.s office to arrest you,” asks the trooper.

“Is it illegal to record police officers?” Houghtaling replies.

“When I tell you to put the phone down and you disregard what I’m telling you, yes, it is,” said Rosenblatt.

“So am I being detained for recording?”

“Put the phone down.”

“Is it illegal to record officers,” Houghtaling asks.

“Give me your license and registration,” the trooper replies.

When asked why he has been pulled over, the trooper explains “your exhaust is extremely loud, that’s why you’re being stopped.”

The officer then becomes belligerent, sarcastically saying, “Have you got an answer for that?’ before again insisting Houghtaling stop filming with his phone.

The troopers then asks, “What is your issue with always videotaping?” to which Houghtaling replies, “Am I legally obligated to answer that?”

“You’re obligated because I asked, you, that’s why” an angry Rosenblatt replies before stalking off.

Watch the video below, uploaded to YouTube by John Houghtaling:

0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 12:16 am
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 12:18 am
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 12:20 am
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 12:22 am
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 12:59 am




0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 12:59 am




hawkeye10
 
  2  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 01:01 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Are you by chance a YOUTUBE employee?
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 06:52 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
And yet we spend $250 per citizen on food stamps and approaching if not passing $1500 per citizen on medicaid per year. That works out to about $3000 per employed person per year being spent on just these two welfare programs alone. This is not sustainable.


LOL when far far less then one percent of our population in fact a thousand of so people have more wealth then the lower fifty percent of our population there are plenty of resources available to aid the bottom half, if we would place sane policies in place.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 08:19 am
@hawkeye10,
No, but I do know how to research. I try to keep my opinions informed. Unlike goooojohn, BillM and carpfart.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Tue 30 Dec, 2014 08:21 am
NYT rightly calls out the NYPD's tantrum: 'They Hijacked Funeral for own petty "Look-at-us gesture'

Police Respect Squandered in Attacks on de Blasio

.......................


" They have taken the most grave and solemn of civic moments — a funeral of a fallen colleague — and hijacked it for their own petty look-at-us gesture. In doing so, they also turned their backs on Mr. Ramos’s widow and her two young sons, and others in that grief-struck family. "



.................

the rest:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/30/opinion/police-respect-squandered-in-attacks-on-de-blasio.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 05/06/2024 at 04:14:29