Thursday, January 28, 2010 - South Carolina Lt. Gov. Under Fire for Comparing Welfare Users to Stray Animals

I couldn't agree more. This guy is telling it straight and I find that refreshing. This is straight talk with zero political correctness and I love it. I would find it hard not to vote for this guy regardless of his party, but I highly doubt a Democrat would ever say such a thing.

This guy is not saying that all welfare recipients are bad, he is pointing out the ones who have always been on welfare, who have children who will grow up to be on welfare, and on and on.

Am I the heartless one for not providing the hand out forever or am I the compassionate one who refuses to give a hand out indefinitely and forces a person to make his/her own way in life? I think one is about owning an obedient pet and the other is treating a person like a human.

Make sure to click on the link to see the full article. I have edited it for size and to make my point. - South Carolina Lt. Gov. Under Fire for Comparing Welfare Users to Stray Animals:

"The lieutenant governor of South Carolina is taking heat for comparing people on government assistance to 'stray animals' and saying the government should stop 'feeding' welfare recipients who do not meet certain requirements because 'they breed.'

Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer, a Republican, was arguing for fundamental changes to welfare to break the 'cycle of dependency' at a town hall meeting in Fountain Inn, S.C., on Friday, when he said:

'My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed. You're facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. ...

'They will reproduce,' Bauer said, 'especially ones that don't think too much further than that. And so what you've got to do is you've got to curtail that type of behavior. They don't know any better.'"

The lieutenant governor said he intended in his remarks to stress the need to "break cycles of dependency." He said he was approached afterward by a black minister who asked him to he deliver the same speech at his church.

"He said 'you are right on the money,'" Bauer told "This was a diverse crowd and nobody there had a problem with the message.

"We've got to really look at every dollar we're spending. A hand-out is basically relief without any demand for change," he said.


Fluffy said...

When I evaluate a philosophy or position I look to see if it works on the small scale AND on the large scale. It is doesn't work on both levels, I reject it as a solid foundation on which to build additional actions or notions. So let's see if the position you wrote about is scalable? Because if this position about welfare is a good one then it should be able to be extended on a larger scale. So let's look at it on a large scale...

Haiti, before the earthquake, was a country that was such a mess on all levels. The people have lived like that for so long, having children and growing their families (breeding) without the basics we take for granted here. As a country they haven't done anything to help themselves and yet they should have. As a country they received aid money all along. Their GDP consists of foreigh aid!

Using your philosophy, tell me if you think we should give them handouts of charity even now. Why should we do anything for a people who have done nothing for themselves all this time? If they didn't help themselves before the earthquake, then what makes us think they will change? Surely, as a country they could have bettered themselves. Why should we now help them build what they never had to begin with? Help me understand how we should respond to Haiti's need, but use your philosophy about not helping strays or chronic welfare recepients when you respond.

Warthog said...

First I agree with your idea of scale. I disagree with your attempt to scale it to Haiti which is equal or monumentally greater. I say greater since the entire culture of Haiti is a welfare state.

I will scale it down to the family which should hit you right at home. When you have children who get everything they want and have to produce zero results you get caos. The children see no reason to do chores, go to school, much less behave. If the worst that is going to happen is a scolding, well hell, anyone can handle being yelled at. Especially, when the punishment is to be sent to your room that has Call of Duty.

There is a reason parents kick the kids out of the house at 18. Because its time to make their own way in life and they can't do it when mom is making the dinners, washing the cloths, and buying the toilet paper.

Hell I know people who moved out of the parents house at 30 and had no clue how to wash cloths, turn on the dish washer, and were shocked at how much money was needed just for toiletries. I did chores so the first two were not a problem, but I was extremely shocked, when I moved out on my own my senior year of highschool, at how much deoderant, shampoo, soap, shaving cream, razors, toothpaste, and other eccentials cost.

So I say, if you take offense to being compared to a stray animal then stop acting like one.

Roof over the head+food+call of duty+no responsibility for school or family-occasional ass chewing = great life

No roof+no power+no food = I better find a f*cking job

If you have read my whole blog you know I am not completely heartless. This speech addressed cronic abusers of welfare, not the people who got laid off and need temporary assistance. I am all for helping people who deserve it. Mr. Bauer is not heartless either, he just wants people to be held accountable and I think he used a great analogy to do it.