Skip to comments.The Return of Welfare as We Used to Know It (Santorum refutes so-called fact checkers)
Posted on 08/28/2012 7:34:29 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
For the first time, the country ended a major entitlement, saving money for taxpayers while helping those in need. I observed this success firsthand when I hired nine women formerly on welfare to work in my office.
President Obama seems determined to reverse this success. His administration recently issued a new directive giving the secretary of Health and Human Services the power to waive federal welfare-work requirements. The president has no authority to do so, because we were very clear in the legislation that work rules were not a requirement that could be waived.
Prior to the 1996 reform, work requirements were dismayingly loosesome states counted activities such as getting a massage, going to Weight Watchers and helping a relative with household tasks. Expect abuses like this to return now, and government assistance to once again trap people in a life of poverty and dependency.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Who better than Santorum, who drafted the welfare reform act, to rebut MSM claims that Romney is playing the race card with these welfare ads
“Wonkbook: Race in the presidential race”
Since we’re currently paying out somewhere in the neighborhood of $700 billion to a trillion dollars per year on welfare, I’d like to ask WHAT FIX?
Address what Obama is doing to make it worse, okay great, but it’s all so broken at this point, it’s downright laughable to blame it all on him.
Each party and every politician in Washington, D. C. has their hands in this vile mess.
We came off eight years of Bush with six years of Senate and House majorities, and we’re left with this welfare system? This is precisely why voting for Leftist Republicans is so destructive.
We get a situation we’ve begged for for decades, and we do very little with it. OUCH, how that smarts.
We are up against a brick wall of ignorance. While attempting to lecture Newt, Chrissy Matthews brought up the “welfare queens” slur popular in the Reagan/Carter days. Newt pointed out that Reagan didn’t use the term, but he let Chrissy ramble on about its racist connotation, black women with babies drawing welfare. What someone needs to ask Chrissy, or someone a little more cognizant of reality, is if he, (pick a better one) thinks black women, or any other women are better off in a society that can offer them nothing besides a life on welfare. As long as government continues to grow at the expense of the economy, welfarism and welfare queens, black and otherwise, will be the norm. ...Of course the harder question is if he thinks a socialist Utopia would continue to carry welfare queens on its back, or tolerate what welfarism has created in inner city communities across the country. Remember Stalin’s solution.
Women who are broken and dependent vote democrat...
Talking about welfare is racist? Are the Dem's saying welfare is disproportionately for blacks? Sounds like *they* are the racists.