Posted on 05/02/2014 1:12:39 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
SIOUX FALLS, SD - U.S. Senate candidate Dr. Annette Bosworth is standing strongly in support of a controversial Facebook post she made on Monday. "The statement is tongue and cheek; it's meant to stir discussion," Bosworth said.
Stir discussion it has.
Bosworth is receiving national attention for a Facebook post she made earlier this week. The post, which has now been shared by nearly 60,000 people, is a photo comparing the country's food stamp program to a national park warning about feeding the animals, which goes on to say the animals would grow dependent on the handout.
"It did ruffle some feathers. It did stimulate all the way to the Washington Post, but that's good. They're talking about it, and that is the problem: that they won't talk about the issues that are really important to the patients and the people I see every day," Bosworth said.
Bosworth says that the food stamp program has trapped many people in a life of poverty, with no signs of recovery. She says the focus should instead be on education and creating jobs.
"Was it a crude statement to begin the conversation? Yes, and if that's what it takes to begin the conversation, so be it," Bosworth said.
The conversation in opposing the post is growing. In a statement to KELOLAND News, Republican Senate candidate Stace Nelson says he is "disappointed at the comments attributed to Annette Bosworth about the poor, elderly, and veterans. We should not blame them for the sad state of this nation. The blame should be on dishonest politicians that claim to be against that which is making Americans further dependent."
Bosworth says critics are taking the words in the post too literally. They should instead see it as a call to action.
"We've lost the war on poverty, we've created a trap and they're stuck. They're good people, they want solutions and that's what your politicians are supposed to be talking about," Bosworth said.
We did also reach out to the Larry Rhoden and Mike Rounds campaign. Both did not offer a comment regarding the post.
I assume this is the post, idea that everyone was talking about...MSNBC, the HuffingtonPuffington Post, and whiny liberals in south Florida are upset.
Makes me want to send this gal, Annette Bosworth, money.
Is she doing well?
Send this woman to Washington! ... well, such punishment might be too harsh for such an honest and forthright Lady.
She’s right.
“I am for doing good to the poor,
but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor,
is not making them easy in poverty,
but leading or driving them out of it.
“I observed...
that the more public provisions were made for the poor,
the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer.
And, on the contrary, the less was done for them,
the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”
-Benjamin Franklin
She says the focus should instead be on education and creating jobs.
The governments job is not to create jobs, but to get out of business' way to create jobs since that is what they do. Education is (at least should be) a State level consideration with cooperation amongst the various States to ensure consistency. The Fed should be nothing more than a moderator.
Teach them to fish!
Cedarville College has started a Charity Exchange where one down on his luck can trade labor & learn skills.
The analogy is exactly appropriate.
How much education money is needed to say:
1)graduate high school
2) stay off drugs
3) don’t get pregnant or get someone pregnant.
do those 3 things are you’re nearly guaranteed to not be poor(or at least stay poor forever)
I love it. But I’m sure some FReepers will complain “it’s childish” (they know who they are).
1)graduate high school
Yeah, got that.
2) stay off drugs
Done.
3) don’t get pregnant or get someone pregnant
Damn.
do those 3 things are you’re nearly guaranteed to not be poor
Now you tell me...
The third one is done with the express intention of getting paid for breeding welfare bastards; changing that one alone would significantly impact the “poor” population in this country. The welfare reform of 1996 cut the black birth rate significantly (after Al $harpton indignantly insisted they weren’t breeding bastards for cash - it turned out they were); the impact was seen quickly when Hispanics passed them as the largest minority group ten years ealrier than projected.
Sadly though I think that also increased the abortion rate.
I always thought it spoke well of conservatives that we fight so hard to save the lives of pre-born future Democrat voters.
Terrific pic-—it should be plastered all over the place.
.
“Sadly though I think that also increased the abortion rate. I always thought it spoke well of conservatives that we fight so hard to save the lives of pre-born future Democrat voters.”
That was a concern at the time, but I think it was being bandied about by the same people that thought teen pregnancies were caused by ignorance rather than the cash payouts. The gibsmedats weren’t getting pregnant accidentally; they were doing it to advance their “careers” as permanent wards of the taxpayers (they’d get set up in an apartment, with welfare, food stamps, free college tuition, etc.).
Controversial statement, to be sure, but can anyone deny the basic truth contained in this analogy?
Creating a dependency is one of the more hazardous projects anyone can come up with. The very real dangers contained in an overly broad altruism creates the antagonism that results in an irreversible conflict in the future.
Gratitude is one of the most ephemeral of emotions.
One of my daughters recently had a baby and I spent a couple hours over two days at one of the local maternity hospitals.
I can say based on a limited data set that:
1) not many Republicans are having babies
2) most of the babies that are being born are being paid for by Republicans
As the signs say in Yosemite, “A fed bear is a dead bear”
“I can say based on a limited data set that:
1) not many Republicans are having babies
2) most of the babies that are being born are being paid for by Republicans”
I’ve been posting along those lines for years; as my own children were born over several years (in a hospital in a white, wealthy area - not my town, of course), the ratio of American babies (black or white) to Hispanic babies (mostly anchor babies with the additional benefit of generating public assistance) was at best 1:7 or so. Not only are Republicans not breeding, but it has already had a radical effect on this country that will be more pronounced with each passing DAY.
Obama’s re-election was proof that we had changed dramatically demographically; don’t believe the BS that whites will be a minority in 2042 - it will happen by 2020 at the latest. Most of the old people dying are white, and practically all of the new people being born are not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.