Ryan's War On People in Poverty: Here We GO Again: 47% message

[rightwinger]

that 47% had it MUCH BETTER WHEN REPUBLICANS RAN THINGS

true story


libs are losers who lie to themselves

Being sent to two wars and losing 700,000 jobs a month? Oh yea, the 47% were THRILLED with the Republicans and showed it at the polls

obama oversaw the largest increase in House Republicans in 60 years.. so yea what were people showing at the polls then genius?

libs are idiots who lie to themselves

Ummmm.....Bush lost the House, Senate AND Whitehouse to the Dems

Triple Crown

 

[RandomVariable]

Well this certainly a surprise.I mean really a surprise. Strategically it seems completely ill timed. The tactic would normally be try to run Obama's budget over the coals for two weeks at the very least. Does this mean they don't think they can run Obama's budget over the coals? Do they feel the only way to take the edge off of Obama's budget is to counter with Ryan's document out of the gate. This could be a sign of real desperation. If it is not then do they think that they can come over the top of Obama's budget and grab broad based appeal? I haven't looked over Ryan's document yet, heck, I have only read the first dozen or so pages of Obama's budget. The document Ryan released is 205 pages long. It is not actually a budget so it won't be exactly comparing apples to apples.

 

[Mathbud1]

It might help if you read and represented what Ryan is actually saying (maybe, maybe not.)

But rather than provide a roadmap out of poverty, Washington has created a complex web of programs that are often difficult to navigate. Some programs provide critical aid to families in need. Others discourage families from getting ahead. And for many of these programs, we just don’t know. There’s little evidence either way.

So in a spirit of reform, this report hopes to inform the public debate. This important anniversary is an opportunity to review the record in full. And we should seize it.

The War on Poverty: 50 Years Later | Budget.House.Gov

Is there any particular reason why the safety net should not be examined? As a safety net I would imagine holes in that net would be a concern?

Since the report he released "is short on policy prescriptions" it seems what you are actually opposing is the fact that he dared to examine the programs that are in place to see what may or may not be working. I know the safety net is sacred ground, but if we are going to have one shouldn't we make sure it is working?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

It might help if you read and represented what Ryan is actually saying (maybe, maybe not.)

But rather than provide a roadmap out of poverty, Washington has created a complex web of programs that are often difficult to navigate. Some programs provide critical aid to families in need. Others discourage families from getting ahead. And for many of these programs, we just don’t know. There’s little evidence either way.

So in a spirit of reform, this report hopes to inform the public debate. This important anniversary is an opportunity to review the record in full. And we should seize it.

The War on Poverty: 50 Years Later | Budget.House.Gov

Is there any particular reason why the safety net should not be examined? As a safety net I would imagine holes in that net would be a concern?

Since the report he released "is short on policy prescriptions" it seems what you are actually opposing is the fact that he dared to examine the programs that are in place to see what may or may not be working. I know the safety net is sacred ground, but if we are going to have one shouldn't we make sure it is working?

The safety net has always been reexamined and the GOP has mostly been against it since before they even knew what the particulars were.

Ryan's motivations have always been suspect, after all: Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan said he regularly gave out Ayn Rand novel ‘Atlas Shrugged’ as Christmas gifts, but today he says he no longer espouses her beliefs. Paul Ryan does an about-face on Ayn Rand - CSMonitor.com

 

[theHawk]

Ryan's War On People in Poverty: Here We GO Again: 47% message Paul Ryan calls for cuts to anti-poverty programs in GOP budget - latimes.com


By Lisa Mascaro This post has been corrected. See note at the bottom for details.

March 3, 2014, 10:07 a.m.

WASHINGTON - House Budget Committee Chairman Paul D. Ryan is taking aim at the nation's poverty programs, unveiling an ambitious report Monday that will underpin Republican budget priorities this election year.

The former Republican vice presidential nominee is long on criticism of the nearly $800 billion in government spending on more than 90 different poverty programs in 2012 that provided food, housing, education and other assistance for low-income Americans.

But the report is short on policy prescriptions, which are coming later from the budget chairman.

Paul Ryan calls for cuts to anti-poverty programs in GOP budget - latimes.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------


Poor GOP. It can't catch a break what with all those wingnuts in positions of power in their caucus

It's amazing how stating facts can make liberals crazy.

You libs would love to see the vast majority of people dependent on the State, propped up by a few elites who get taxed to death to support them. After all, those downtrodden poor people are too stupid to ever make it on their own, right?

 

[rightwinger]

Ryan's War On People in Poverty: Here We GO Again: 47% message Paul Ryan calls for cuts to anti-poverty programs in GOP budget - latimes.com


By Lisa Mascaro This post has been corrected. See note at the bottom for details.

March 3, 2014, 10:07 a.m.

WASHINGTON - House Budget Committee Chairman Paul D. Ryan is taking aim at the nation's poverty programs, unveiling an ambitious report Monday that will underpin Republican budget priorities this election year.

The former Republican vice presidential nominee is long on criticism of the nearly $800 billion in government spending on more than 90 different poverty programs in 2012 that provided food, housing, education and other assistance for low-income Americans.

But the report is short on policy prescriptions, which are coming later from the budget chairman.

Paul Ryan calls for cuts to anti-poverty programs in GOP budget - latimes.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------


Poor GOP. It can't catch a break what with all those wingnuts in positions of power in their caucus

It's amazing how stating facts can make liberals crazy.

You libs would love to see the vast majority of people dependent on the State, propped up by a few elites who get taxed to death to support them. After all, those downtrodden poor people are too stupid to ever make it on their own, right?

As a lib, I would love to see the vast majority of people in well paying jobs that they can support themselves on.

But since Conservatives have done everything in their power to hold down wages and benefits.......I guess social programs is the next best alternative

 

[Stephanie]

too me, using people in this fashion like the Democrats do is offensive

they act like these people can never make anything of themselves they have to have money and government for them to live...

even think of cutting a little from a program (because by golly that money that funds it GROWS ON FRIKKEN TREES) and you get titles like the one from the LAslimes

they've done it to black for years, now working on Hispanics and the "poor"

it's sickening to see a Lamestream newspaper spreading fearmongering about a party and a politician in this fashion

shun that paper folks, in fact don't subscribe to it and hit them where it hurts

 

[Mathbud1]

It might help if you read and represented what Ryan is actually saying (maybe, maybe not.)

But rather than provide a roadmap out of poverty, Washington has created a complex web of programs that are often difficult to navigate. Some programs provide critical aid to families in need. Others discourage families from getting ahead. And for many of these programs, we just don’t know. There’s little evidence either way.

So in a spirit of reform, this report hopes to inform the public debate. This important anniversary is an opportunity to review the record in full. And we should seize it.

The War on Poverty: 50 Years Later | Budget.House.Gov

Is there any particular reason why the safety net should not be examined? As a safety net I would imagine holes in that net would be a concern?

Since the report he released "is short on policy prescriptions" it seems what you are actually opposing is the fact that he dared to examine the programs that are in place to see what may or may not be working. I know the safety net is sacred ground, but if we are going to have one shouldn't we make sure it is working?

The safety net has always been reexamined and the GOP has mostly been against it since before they even knew what the particulars were.

Ryan's motivations have always been suspect, after all: Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan said he regularly gave out Ayn Rand novel ‘Atlas Shrugged’ as Christmas gifts, but today he says he no longer espouses her beliefs. Paul Ryan does an about-face on Ayn Rand - CSMonitor.com

Again, it might help to read what he actually said (again, maybe not)

From the interview where he said he gave out the book:

His staff, however, gets the benefit of his pedagogical streak. "I give out 'Atlas Shrugged' [by Ayn Rand] as Christmas presents, and I make all my interns read it. Well, . . . I try to make my interns read it." Ryan "looked into" Ayn Rand's philosophy, Objectivism, when he was young, he says, but he is a Christian and reads the Bible frequently.

And from the later interview where he supposedly about-faced:

“I, like millions of young people in America, read Rand’s novels when I was young. I enjoyed them,” Ryan says. “They spurred an interest in economics, in the Chicago School and Milton Friedman,” a subject he eventually studied as an undergraduate at Miami University in Ohio. “But it’s a big stretch to suggest that a person is therefore an Objectivist.”
“I reject her philosophy,” Ryan says firmly. “It’s an atheist philosophy. It reduces human interactions down to mere contracts and it is antithetical to my worldview. If somebody is going to try to paste a person’s view on epistemology to me, then give me Thomas Aquinas,” who believed that man needs divine help in the pursuit of knowledge. “Don’t give me Ayn Rand,” he says.

That doesn't look like an about-face to me.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

LyinRyan was on the news this morning bitching about President Obama. After saying that "this admin" wasn't handling Putin right, he then said we should do exactly what the president is doing.

He's lying slime.

 

[Mathbud1]

Ok so basically since the report he released wasn't actually a war on people in poverty we've switched to just trying to bash the guy himself.

I see.

 

[Agit8r]

yeah, darn those SS survivor benefits that held him back

 

[RandomVariable]

I guess their strategy was actually tactically brilliant. Dang them. I interrupted my reading of Obama's budget to read Ryan's "War on Poverty". I only started yesterday so I have not gotten very far. I did learn the main reason for poverty, too many poor black people.

 

[RandomVariable]

The report opens with a little intro to the War on Poverty, a little overview, some background, and by the second page of text it gets right down to the causes of poverty. The first cause is, of course, family. And the first paragraph of that cause reads as such:

The Causes of Poverty
Family
Perhaps the single most important determinant of poverty is family structure. It has been the subject of fierce academic debate since the Moynihan Report—named after its author, then-assistant secretary of labor Daniel Patrick Moynihan—was released in 1965. The Moynihan Report identified the Breakdown of the family as a key cause of poverty within the black community.8

(8) Daniel Moynihan, “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action.” U.S. Department of Labor, Mar. 1965.

This Moynihan Report must have really been something. It was not until this Moynihan Report was published that the debate on family structure began. Apparently the House Budget Committee has taken great reflection upon this ground breaking work while preparing their document. I just knew I had to get me some look at this document.

http://www.dol.gov/dol/aboutdol/history/moynchapter1.htm
Exerpts from the first chapter of the report:

Chapter I. The Negro American Revolution
The Negro American revolution is rightly regarded as the most important domestic event of the postwar period in the United States.

...

(Such racist views have made progress within the Negro American community itself - which can hardly be expected to be immune to a virus that is endemic in the white community. The Black Muslim doctrines, based on total alienation from the white world, exert a powerful influence. On the far left, the attraction of Chinese Communism can no longer be ignored.)

...

The End of the Beginning
The major events of the onset of the Negro revolution are now behind us.

The political events were three: First, the Negroes themselves organized as a mass movement. ...

…

After an intensive study of the life of central Harlem, the board of directors of Harlem Youth Opportunities Unlimited, Inc. summed up their findings in one statement: "Massive deterioration of the fabric of society and its institutions..."6

It is the conclusion of this survey of the available national data, that what is true of central Harlem, can be said to be true of the Negro American world in general.

If this is so, it is the single most important social fact of the United States today.
[End of Chapter 1]

I do hope the Republicans are not assuming the Negro American vote.

 

[rdean]

I like the way Republicans now say that they are only following what Jesus would want. They politicize everything. Nothing is off limits.

 

[whitehall]

How many times do you have to remind whiny lefties that their guy won the election? Under Barry Hussein the poverty rate has almost doubled. The strange thing is the radical left wants to focus on food stamps instead of jobs.

 

[rdean]

How many times do you have to remind whiny lefties that their guy won the election? Under Barry Hussein the poverty rate has almost doubled. The strange thing is the radical left wants to focus on food stamps instead of jobs.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/343670-household-wealth-in-the-u-s-climbs-to-a-record.html

 

[bedowin62]

How many times do you have to remind whiny lefties that their guy won the election? Under Barry Hussein the poverty rate has almost doubled. The strange thing is the radical left wants to focus on food stamps instead of jobs.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/343670-household-wealth-in-the-u-s-climbs-to-a-record.html

good one idiot; can you point to me where in the link you leftardz are providing that supposedly shows household income so high; where it says exactly what group is seeing a rise in household income?

we all know; or at least those of that arent blind rabid LWNJs; that the RICH AND ONLY THE RICH are getting richer under obama

 

[RandomVariable]

I've been reading along, taking notes, and highlighting text of Ryan's "War of Poverty" document. I was going to wait until I got through the whole thing before posting a summary. The first part is a page or two on each safety net program; short description, pros and cons, and total cost. I just got to page 85, National School Lunch Program. The document states that, "The academic literature suggests that the NSLP contributes to childhood obesity, but overall findings are inconclusive." The titles of the two comments in the pros and cons are "NSPL contributes to obesity among schoolchildren." and "Participating low-income girls see an increase in body mass index." As someone who got one filling meal a day that I ate with relish thanks to NSLP I would like to say something to a certain someone who supports tax cuts for the top tax bracket, I am not saying who, I do hope he does not take this the wrong way. I would like to say, "Please go fuck yourself."

 

[Stephanie]

Well this certainly a surprise.I mean really a surprise. Strategically it seems completely ill timed. The tactic would normally be try to run Obama's budget over the coals for two weeks at the very least. Does this mean they don't think they can run Obama's budget over the coals? Do they feel the only way to take the edge off of Obama's budget is to counter with Ryan's document out of the gate. This could be a sign of real desperation. If it is not then do they think that they can come over the top of Obama's budget and grab broad based appeal? I haven't looked over Ryan's document yet, heck, I have only read the first dozen or so pages of Obama's budget. The document Ryan released is 205 pages long. It is not actually a budget so it won't be exactly comparing apples to apples.

that's just it
everything to a liberal is a game
you will take anything some leftwing rag says and run with it because, you Democrats have no good record to run and gawd forbid these programs have even a penny cut from them...because you and the laslimes figures MONEY GROWS ON TREE'S....and then you, Dante and your party people with the help from the liberal rag like the Laslimes give's which by the way was SO BIASED headlines like the title of this article beat your chest like apes, bellowing how the Gop hate the POOR, CHILDREN, PUPPIES, etc

All you liberals do is USE PEOPLE for you political games and dirty politics like this post of yours...you really don't care they are "poor"

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

It might help if you read and represented what Ryan is actually saying (maybe, maybe not.)


The War on Poverty: 50 Years Later | Budget.House.Gov

Is there any particular reason why the safety net should not be examined? As a safety net I would imagine holes in that net would be a concern?

Since the report he released "is short on policy prescriptions" it seems what you are actually opposing is the fact that he dared to examine the programs that are in place to see what may or may not be working. I know the safety net is sacred ground, but if we are going to have one shouldn't we make sure it is working?

The safety net has always been reexamined and the GOP has mostly been against it since before they even knew what the particulars were.

Ryan's motivations have always been suspect, after all: Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan said he regularly gave out Ayn Rand novel ‘Atlas Shrugged’ as Christmas gifts, but today he says he no longer espouses her beliefs. Paul Ryan does an about-face on Ayn Rand - CSMonitor.com

Again, it might help to read what he actually said (again, maybe not)

From the interview where he said he gave out the book:

His staff, however, gets the benefit of his pedagogical streak. "I give out 'Atlas Shrugged' [by Ayn Rand] as Christmas presents, and I make all my interns read it. Well, . . . I try to make my interns read it." Ryan "looked into" Ayn Rand's philosophy, Objectivism, when he was young, he says, but he is a Christian and reads the Bible frequently.

And from the later interview where he supposedly about-faced:

“I, like millions of young people in America, read Rand’s novels when I was young. I enjoyed them,” Ryan says. “They spurred an interest in economics, in the Chicago School and Milton Friedman,” a subject he eventually studied as an undergraduate at Miami University in Ohio. “But it’s a big stretch to suggest that a person is therefore an Objectivist.”
“I reject her philosophy,” Ryan says firmly. “It’s an atheist philosophy. It reduces human interactions down to mere contracts and it is antithetical to my worldview. If somebody is going to try to paste a person’s view on epistemology to me, then give me Thomas Aquinas,” who believed that man needs divine help in the pursuit of knowledge. “Don’t give me Ayn Rand,” he says.

That doesn't look like an about-face to me.

how convenient...except he wasn't passing out Rand's books in his youth. He was a damned Congressman, not a student or youth