Browsed by
Tag: vote

How Do You Justify This? Fed’s Say Foodstamps Good For The Economy.

How Do You Justify This? Fed’s Say Foodstamps Good For The Economy.

Comments 3 comments

Who the fuck pays for it? Hello!

There are going to be the people who REALLY need this program. But check out the video..these guys seem healthy enough to get a job. Read the justification after the video..if you can stomach reading it.

 

The federal government has been making the case that, with food stamps, “everyone wins,” according to literature meant to promote the federal social welfare program. The argument is that accepting food stamp benefits helps to promote economic growth for the communities hosting those recipients.

“Each $5 dollars in new SNAP benefits generates almost twice that amount in economic activity for the community,” states the federal government pamphlet. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the official name of the food stamps program. “Everyone wins when eligible people take advantage of benefits to which they are entitled,” states the pamphlet, which is written and distributed by the United States Department of Agriculture, the federal entity responsible for the program.
“Even a small increase in SNAP participation can have a substantial impact,” the website states. “If the national participation rate rose 5 percentage points, 1.9 million more low-income people would have an additional $1.3 billion in benefits per year to use to purchase healthy foodand $2.5 billion total in new economic activity would be generated nationwide.”

The key here is that the federal government is encouraging greater, not less, participation in the program. And under a section titled, “Why does increasing participation in SNAP make sense for your community?,” the government states: 

SNAP Generates Economic Activity

SNAP brings Federal dollars into communities in the form of benefits which are redeemed by SNAP participants at local stores. These benefits ripple throughout the economies of the community, State, and Nation. For example:

Every $5 in new SNAP benefits generates a total of $9.20 in community spending.
Every additional dollar’s worth of SNAP benefits generates 17 to 47 cents of new spending on food.
On average, $1 billion of retail food demand by SNAP recipients generates 3,300 farm jobs.

In fiscal year 2009, the average monthly SNAP benefit per household was approximately $272. These benefits, funded by Federal dollars, create business when they are redeemed at your local food retailers. Eighty-six percent of benefits, totaling $25 billion, were redeemed at the nation’s 35,000 supermarkets. The remaining benefits, totaling $3.6 billion, contribute to the viability of 121,000 other firms which include grocery stores, convenience stores, combination stores, farmer’s markets, and other retail food stores; plus wholesalers and meal services.

And another USDA food stamps document,  ironically titled “Building a Healthy America: A Profile of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program,” suggests that despite some people not wanting to participate in the program due to “a sense that benefits are not needed,” more people should change their mind–and sign up for the social welfare program.

Why Did Romney Speak At The NAACP?

Why Did Romney Speak At The NAACP?

Comments 4 comments

I have been trying to wrap my head around what benefit he would get by speaking in this hostile environment. After hearing all of the race baiters and Obama apologists out there, I think I get it.
Basically a brilliant move to show that he is concerned about the plight of the african american who is being pigeon holed into poverty by handouts that they gladly accept and become reliant on.

Sometimes the truth hurts and the NAACP has become complicit in its empowerment of the nanny state. They should be all hands on deck trying to solve the problem of minority poverty and unemployment, yet when faced with th truth, they boo and lash out to the bootlicking liberal media. shameful really.
A few examples:

If I were a political cynic, I’d wonder whether the Romney campaign wanted to be booed at NAACP. After the speech, Mayor Kasim Reed of Atlanta, an Obama supporter, said that was exactly the point. Romney’s aim, he said, was to appear as a bold leader who could tell hard truths. “I think his statement was more a political stunt,” Reed said.

Julian Bond, the noted civil rights leader and former head of the NAACP, echoed the legislators, telling HuffPost, “He is definitely not his father.” Bond said he did not see Romney’s appearance as genuine outreach to the African American community.
“He went there to bait us,” Bond said. He argued that Romney deliberately sparked boos by referring to “Obamacare,” which Bond said many African Americans regard as pejorative.
“He wanted to be able to go to some of the independents he needs to get elected and tell them, ‘See? I stood up to the Negroes,’” Bond said.

Last night on MSNBC, host Lawrence O’Donnell said that Romney’s NAACP speech was part of a Republican ‘southern strategy’ used to appeal to ‘racial and racist voting.’ Speaking to TheGrio.com’s Goldie Taylor, O’Donnell said, “Tell me, Goldie, if I’m being too cynical, to think that the Romney campaign actually went in that room today with the hope of getting booed, at least three times, because they want the video of their candidate being booed by the NAACP to play in certain racist precincts where that will actually help them.”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Wednesday that Mitt Romney made a “calculated move” to get booed during his address earlier in the day before the NAACP.

“I think it was a calculated move on his part to get booed at the NAACP convention,” she told Bloomberg TV.

Clayola Brown, the member of the NAACP’s National Board of Directors who invited Romney to speak, said the presumptive Republican presidential nominee should not have used unemployment numbers to try to turn the crowd against Obama.

“It was insensitive and quite demeaning as a matter of fact,” Brown told The Washington Examiner after Romney exited the stage. “Certainly we are aware of what the numbers are and the impact is in our communities. It’s the dialogue used that we find insulting.”

How Do You Spank A Rogue State? Ask Arizona!

How Do You Spank A Rogue State? Ask Arizona!

Comments 3 comments

This is not an executive administration, this is a “regime” using the executive branch to punish those whom they find out of line or bothersome. It is the Chicago way! A Nod to Weasel Zippers for the article.

(CNSNews.com) – The administration’s decision to end agreements with law enforcement agencies in Arizona just hours after the Supreme Court’s June 25 ruling on the state’s immigration law was not a political move, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director John Morton told lawmakers Tuesday.
Under section 287 (g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, state and local law enforcement forces can partner with ICE to enforce immigration laws in their jurisdictions. Immediately following the Supreme Court’s ruling on Arizona Senate Bill 1070, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) suspended 287 (g) programs with the state’s law enforcement agencies.

The landmark decision deemed most of SB 1070’s provisions unconstitutional, but upheld the provision allowing Arizona law enforcement to request documentation from individuals suspected to be in the United States illegally.

During a hearing Tuesday of the House Homeland Security subcommittee on border and maritime security, vice-chairman Rep. Ben Quayle (R-Ariz.) asked Morton about the decision to suspend 287 (g) agreements in the state.

“I find it a little concerning that you recently gotten rid of the 287(g) agreement with Arizona state and local law enforcement agencies,” Quayle said. “What is the reasoning behind it? Why pick Arizona as the sole one right now, to actually remove a program that, you said, was an essential component of DHS’s comprehensive immigration enforcement strategy?”

Holder Kisses La Raza’s Ass…

Holder Kisses La Raza’s Ass…

Comments 2 comments

….are you fucking kidding me? A shameless hispanic voter grab.

Do you know what La Raza really is? They want the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo  repealed under the name of:

The name Aztlán was first taken up by a group of Chicano independence activists led by Oscar Zeta Acosta during the Chicano movement of the 1960s and 1970s. They used the name Aztlán to refer to the lands of Northern Mexico that were annexed by the United States as a result of the Mexican-American War. Combined with the claim of some historical linguists and anthropologists that the original homeland of the Aztecan peoples was located in the southwestern United States[citation needed], Aztlán, in this sense, became a symbol for mestizo activists who believe they have a legal and primordial right to the land. In order to exercise this right, some members of the Chicano movement propose that a new nation be created, a Republica del Norte.[9]

In an address to the National Council of La Raza convention in Las Vegas on Saturday, Attorney General Eric Holder told the Hispanic advocacy group that the gains of the Civil Rights era were coming “under renewed threat,” and touted the administration’s efforts in protecting the rights of minority groups and immigrants.

Fuck You!

More People In Wagon, Not Enough Pullin’

More People In Wagon, Not Enough Pullin’

Comments 0 Comment

More workers joined the federal government’s disability program in June than got new jobs, according to two new government reports, a clear indicator of how bleak the nation’s jobs picture is after three full years of economic recovery.

The economy created just 80,000 jobs in June, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday. But that same month, 85,000 workers left the workforce entirely to enroll in the Social Security Disability Insurance program, according to the Social Security Administration.

The disability ranks have outpaced job growth throughout President Obama’s recovery. While the economy has created 2.6 million jobs since June 2009, fully 3.1 million workers signed up for disability benefits.

In other words, the number of new disability enrollees has climbed 19% faster than the number of jobs created during the sluggish recovery. (Even after accounting for people who left the disability program because they died or aged into retirement, disability ranks have climbed more than 1.1 million in the past three years.)

And the disability ranks will continue to swell. In just the last month, almost 275,000 put in applications for disability benefits. Experts say that more people try to get on disability when jobs are scarce, and changes to eligibility rules enacted back in 1984 have made it far easier to qualify.

In addition, while hiring has been very weak during the recovery, the number of people who have dropped out of the labor force entirely has exploded by 7.3 million since June 2009, an IBD analysis of BLS data show. Some aged into retirement, but most either signed up for disability, stayed in school, moved back in with parents, or just quit looking for a job.

As a result, the “labor force participation rate” — the number of people who have jobs or are actively looking for one compared with the entire working-age population — is now 63.8%, down from 65.7% in June 2009. This participation rate is at the lowest levels in 30 years. In previous recoveries, the participation rate has almost always risen, not fallen.

Other indicators show that the three-year-old economic recovery isn’t producing jobs in adequate numbers:

The unemployment rate has been above 8% for 41 consecutive months. In the previous 60 years, the jobless topped 8% in a total of only 39 months.

The number of people with jobs is still nearly 5 million below its pre-recession peak.

The number of long-term unemployed — those out of work 27 weeks or more — is still 5.4 million — almost 1 million higher than when the recovery began, and almost twice the level it ever reached prior to Obama’s recovery.

A Nod to Weasel Zippers for the story

Obama To Fire Fighters….”We got your back.”….But Behind Your Back We Took Your Planes And Made Some Regulations You Need To Follow

Obama To Fire Fighters….”We got your back.”….But Behind Your Back We Took Your Planes And Made Some Regulations You Need To Follow

Comments 3 comments

As fire rages out of control on the edge of Colorado Springs, threatening lives and property, it is time we listen to those who have warned us about the negative effect environmentalists and President Barack Obama have had on the federal government’s ability to fight fires.

Much of what’s burning is the Pike National Forest, which is federal property. Yet it took almost three days to get federal fire fighting aircraft off the ground to begin dumping meaningful loads of slurry to slow the fire’s growth. Because the Forest Service has a shortage of planes, Air Force C-130s finally joined the effort Monday afternoon to battle a fire that began Saturday morning.

Part of the problem is red tape and vague policy regarding use of military aircraft to put out fires, even when they burn federal property. Part of it involves intentional interference with aerial fire suppression. Part of the problem is the Obama administration.

Environmentalists have fought the use of slurry for years, which may or may not explain why Obama seems to lack enthusiasm for a robust tanker fleet. Environmentalists sued to stop the use of fire retardant after it killed 50 steelhead trout in the Santa Ynez River near Santa Barbara, Calif., in 2009. An earlier lawsuit involved the accidental dumping of between 1,000 and 2,000 gallons of fire retardant into Oregon’s Fall River in 2002, a mistake that killed all fish in the river. That mishap involved a slurry formula that is no longer used.

As a result of the most recent lawsuit, the Forest Service adopted rules that prevent dropping slurry within 300 feet of streams and lakes except when human lives are at risk. Forest officials say the rules won’t harm firefighting efforts. We hope that is true. Even if it is, we know that a shortage of planes to drop retardants most certainly hinders firefighting throughout the country. That’s common sense.

(Does anyone in Washington DC understand how many streams and lakes are in the fucking mountains of Colorado, Utah,  California or any western states mountains? Once again idiots in DC making decisions they know nothing about!)

Former Gazette editorial page editor Sean Paige confronts “the Green threat to our economy, property and freedoms” on his website MonkeyWrenchingAmerica.com. Just days before the Waldo Canyon fire began, Paige explained how the Obama administration is doing an election-year scramble to get the U.S. Forest Service the air support it needs to battle what promises to be an explosive wildfire season.

“Less than a year ago, the same administration seemed to be doing its best to leave the Forest Service ill-equipped to deal with the mounting wildfire threat, by summarily cancelling a contract with a company that furnished roughly one third of the wildfire-fighting tankers in the agency’s already-depleted fleet. That action might loom large as calls mount for an investigation into why the agency’s air assets seem inadequate to meet the threat.”

Washington-based Human Events magazine reported in September of 2011 that nearly half of the federal government’s air tankers sat idle at a California airport, as wildfires ripped through national forests throughout California, Texas, New Mexico, and other states.

It turns out the Obama administration ended a long-standing contract, leaving the Forest Service with only 11 tankers to battle 50 wildfires that were burning nationwide. A decade ago, the Forest Service had 40 firefighting tankers.

The Obama administration canceled the government’s contract with Aero Union — a company with 60 employees that had been under contract with the Forest Service for 50 years. Though it canceled that contract, the administration had no plan for an immediate replacement. Aero Union CEO Britt Gourley told Human Events the administration provided no details on why the contract was ended.

“They didn’t want to talk about it,” Gourley said of Obama administration officials.

A Forest Service official said the contract was cancelled over safety concerns, but the company had recently passed its annual inspection.

We can try connecting dots and presume the Obama administration is more enthused with environmental activism than effective fire suppression. That would be speculation, as it is impossible to know any person’s true motive. We know for sure that our country’s fleet of firefighting aircraft has diminished during Obama’s reign. Meanwhile, fires are igniting all over Colorado, far exceeding government’s ability to quickly contain them.

 

Little Liberties At A Time…Sad.

Little Liberties At A Time…Sad.

Comments 2 comments

How come an HOA has all of the sudden gained this much control? I understand certain aspects of the associations, but this is asinine!

A Nod to Drudge for the article.

FOX News -Denver mom Sarah Cohen says drawing sidewalk chalk art is one of her three-year-old daughter Emerson’s “simple pleasures in life.” “It’s definitely better than video games,” Cohen told KCNC. However, the homeowner’s association in Cohen’s neighborhood feels differently. They say Emerson’s drawings — usually of hearts and flowers — are distracting and offensive blights on their community.

“My initial reaction was, ‘You have to be kidding me,” Cohen said. The association, called Innovations and Courtyard Traditions at Stapleton, temporarily banned children from drawing on sidewalks, saying anything that offends, disturbs or interferes with the peaceful enjoyment is not allowed on shared spaces. They said neighbors have been complaining about chalk drawings like Emerson’s.
The group’s attorney told the station that the association is going down a path of “do no harm” and is temporarily banning the chalk art until it is discussed in depth at a later meeting. It will then be up to the residents to decide if the art will be permanently banned.
Cohen said she has not personally received any complaints from neighbors, and her daughter will continue to draw as a sort of mini protest against the temporary ban.

Read more: http://www.myfoxny.com/story/18847568/denver-neighborhood-bans-children-from-drawing-chalk-art-on-sidewalk#ixzz1yUEKeTEx