Media bias: another article about children in poverty makes absolutely no mention of their father

wordpress ^ | August 23, 2017 | Dan from Squirrel Hill

[DoughtyOne]

Fast food restaurants are entry level jobs. They are intended to be a person’s first job, and those who hold them are considered to be people getting an education or bettering themselves so they can move on to higher paying jobs.

It’s not our problem that someone gets themselves in trouble, then has to take on a job like this out of desperation.

The owner of the work place has no obligation to take care of this woman. Society doesn’t either.

Causing employers to kill jobs, is not the solution. Women like this and the ass hat clowns that push their agenda, are killing jobs.

Screw that noise. Tell them to go pound sand.

[UnwashedPeasant]

Make voluntary sterilization a requirement for long-term welfare. Give bounties for voluntary sterilization.

Vastly reduce generational poverty.

[DIRTYSECRET]

Aspirin works every time.

[Joe Bfstplk]

The welfare recipient named all of her children George. “I say George, dinner, and they all come.”

Asked how she called individuals she replied, “Oh, I calls them by their last names.”

Not caring for children is abuse. The parent should be locked up.

[DoughtyOne]

Between the knees..., sure does.

[shibumi]

So you found a convenient omission in the Legacy Media.
They are not the only ones who conveniently omit things...

According to your Wiki user profile page, linked here -

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Grundle2600&oldid=353969441#My_user_name

You favor legal RECREATIONAL drug use.

You support “Same Sex Marriage.”

You are “Pro Choice” (meaning you support legalized abortion.)

You support UNIVERSAL health care.

You support (the lunatic) Ron Paul.

(And you proudly state that you voted for Gary Johnson.)

You are totally opposed to the Death Penalty.

(Although you don’t have a problem with legal abortion.)

So why are you posting on FreeRepublic, a site that is opposed in principle to so much that you support?

[ronnie raygun]

It takes a village don’t ya know

[iowamark]

The idea of marriage, the idea of a father supporting his children, even the idea of learning to read and write English, are not even considered by many today.

[Slyfox]

Hey, Hey, LBJ ...

[iowamark]

Despite working six days a week, Marion, 37, a single mother of two, can’t make ends meet on the $9.50 an hour she gets at Popeyes... A fast food worker for 22 years, Marion has almost always had a second job. Until recently, she had been working 9am-4pm at Popeyes, without a break, then crossing town to a janitorial job at Bartle Hall, the convention center, where she would work from 5pm to 1.30am for $11 an hour. She didn’t take breaks there either, although they were allowed.

She worked 15 hours a day and grossed 772.50 per week, or 38,625 for 50 weeks. She was doing ok financially.

[Pontiac]

Finally, here is a seven minute video with information that liberals never talk about. In my opinion, every middle school and high school in the U.S. should show this to all of their students, repeatedly, every year.

Nah!

They’d rather have the students watch AlGore’s ‘Inconvenient Truth’ lies for 90 minutes.

[utahagen]

In The New Yorker magazine, profiles of urban girls/women in the NYC’s welfare system typically note, “Kayla got pregnant with her first child when she was fifteen.” Fifty percent of the time, the article will mention the baby's father, then describe how and why he drifted out of the picture; fifty percent of the time, there's no mention of the baby's father at all. After the first baby is born, it's as of every subsequent pregnancy is caused by an air-born virus. You'll be reading the article, reading about how Kayla was taking a job-training course, for example, and there will be a matter-of-fact note, “Two months after she turned seventeen, Julia gave birth to twins.” You , the reader, look up from the magazine and say — actually say, even if you are sitting alone in your apartment, drinking a Diet Coke - “Gave birth to twins? How the devil did that happen?”

[oblomov]

Of course it mentions the father.

The father is the state, of course.

The “Fight for $15 Movement” is just an attempt to get the father to do the right thing and get more money from the productive at gunpoint.

Because a $15/hr minimum wage will cause widespread automation of the fast food jobs that Fran cherishes, and greater welfare dependency.

[dragnet2]

That’s not part of the globalist/media narrative. Besides, they’re too busy bringing in our replacements to be concerned about the truth.

[grundle]

I post at Free Republic because it’s a wonderful place with a lot of people who agree with me that children need two parents.

[Architect of Avalon]

Fathers are treated as villains, incompetent, irrelevant, or ATMs.

[LYDIAONTARIO]

LOL!! Darn those storks!

[LYDIAONTARIO]

Cheaper to have a single mom Group Home - no boyfriends allowed to live there, only women and children. If you are not working a job, you do child care & cleaning. No children starve and no money goes to mother getting nails done. Those who get good jobs have the option to move out into their own place.

[sargon]

So why are you [grundle] posting on FreeRepublic, a site that is opposed in principle to so much that you support?

Perhaps he observes the rules of the community, and doesn't go on rampages regarding the issues on which he differs.

Additionally, there are many fans of Ron Paul—and Rand Paul—on this site. Ron Paul is not a lunatic. That's merely your opinion.

Favoring legal recreational drug use shouldn't be anything controversial to someone who isn't a self-righteous Nanny- Stater, and who ostensibly believes in minimal government.

You are aware that alcohol is a drug, I presume? A recreational one? There are others, such as marijuana—a plant created by God, last time I checked—which, like alcohol, is also a recreational drug, and which is also now legal in many states.

Indeed, although traditionally legal, alcohol is the worst recreational drug on the face of the earth, inasmuch as it's a drug whose negative qualities—in the form of damage to health, violent assaults, murders, rapes, vehicular homicides, physical and psychological domestic abuse, etc.—far exceed those of all other drugs combined, both legal and illegal.

Parenthetically, anyone who claims to believe in minimal government while supporting the ever-expanding, bloated Police State necessary to enforce Contraband Law—along with the trampling of Constitutional Rights which invariably accompanies it—can hardly be considered a small-government "conservative", IMHO.

No-knock warrants, violation of privacy, searches conducted without probable cause, and asset forfeiture, for example, are but a few examples of the disregard for Constitutional Rights which routinely accrue due to the existence of such Tyrannical Law.

But I digress. On to the death penalty.

There are also many FReepers who oppose the death penalty—or at least have serious reservations about it—inasmuch as it has been erroneously applied to innocents, and is irrevocable. It's rather hard to Establish Justice for someone who has been wrongfully convicted in such a case. And such cases have occurred—many times, in fact. But even once should be sufficient to give any Christian pause.

As for health care, America has had de facto universal healthcare for many decades. Indeed, it would be an overt violation of the Hippocratic Oath for any doctor to refuse to render essential services to anyone who needed them. While nobody can technically force a doctor to provide health care services against his will, if withholding such services were to cause harm to the patient, that would constitute a violation of the Hippocratic Oath which all doctors take.

Being a supporter of universal health care doesn't necessarily imply a desire to impose a Tyrannical, leviathan, bureaucratic top-down system of socialist rationing. Again, however, America has (for all intents and purposes) had universal healthcare for well over half a century—and until Obamacare, without the socialist Tyranny.

To summarize, simply because this FReeper doesn't agree 100% with your various dogmatic positions, shouldn't mean he isn't welcome here—as long as he abides by the site guidelines, and as long as he doesn't engage in gratuitous antagonism regarding the issues where he stands in the clear minority.

I've seen grundle around here on and off for the last 15 years or so, and don't ever recall him causing any significant problem. If you disagree with him on so many issues, perhaps—through the art of persuasion—he can be disabused of some of his more fallacious policy positions...