I find it interesting that you Republican types (yeah, that's pretty obvious, too, from subtext of your message) honor choice under these sorts of circumstance but not under other circumstances, as in choice over what one might do with her own body. I like how you suggest a tolerance of abortion-- maybe it's ok for poor black folks? Geez, who needs another of THEM, eh?

Your bigotry and ignorance reeks with almost every statement in your first paragraph.  This is definitely a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Where do you get your statistics, by which you're basing your observation of a "very strong correlation"? The Focus on the Family "Institute"??

its funny... cause in a Bush world, you can't have an abortion.



as for the rest of this, its the steroetypical welfare mother not the real monther. I know cause I am with them. there are, of course, those who do it on purpose and it is easy to find one or 2 everyday out of the 20 who are there. I hear them talking about what they should get and how they will cheat the system, but there are others are not trying to do that and most don't.

1) You have never been poor and most likely come from a middle class family, never really going without food or decent clothing. Certainly never having your utilities turned off or having to worry where your next meal would come from. Ever have shoes from Payless? Shopped at K-mart? It is doubtful. Of course you'll probably say you had it hard, even if your family is worth quite a bit. I know a millionaire who complains about how poor she is. 2.) Nuclear Family with a mommy and a daddy, daddy played football (baseball? Rugby? Lacrosse?) with you on weekends while mommy baked cookies and lived at home. She could afford to do this because Daddy is which? (Lawyer? Doctor? CEO? Military Officer?) 3.)You will never understand the plight of the poor. you can't! You have no point of reference of the pain of that existence or how hard it is to work out of it.

Interesting assumptions. I tend to agree with juxta in that charity is not the role of the government, and I DO come from a poor background. In fact, I am currently supporting my family of 7 on far less than the poverty line for a family of FOUR! I don't consider us "poor", nor do I allow my children to get caught in the mire of believing we are poor. I have a healthy family, a good house, adequate food (we're turning our house into a homestead), and everything a person could honestly need...WITHOUT begging the government for handouts.

We have a HUGE deficit, a massive national debt, and basically are on the fast track towards bankruptcy as a nation if we indulge every pet social project of every activist. Somewhere, we MUST draw the line, and rely on the PRIVATE sector to address these needs.

its funny... cause in a Bush world, you can't have an abortion. as for the rest of this, its the steroetypical welfare mother not the real monther. I know cause I am with them. there are, of course, those who do it on purpose and it is easy to find one or 2 everyday out of the 20 who are there. I hear them talking about what they should get and how they will cheat the system, but there are others are not trying to do that and most don't.

I beg to differ with you.  While using this as a stereotype of all unwed mothers is bad, it is a sad fact of life that many welfare mothers do just this to increase benefits.  that is not an opinion, but a fact.  And that has to be stopped.  How?  That is the rub.  For to manditorially sterilize them is wrong, and so the courts have agreed.  To push them out of the welfare class, is criminal to their children who are the innocent victims.

I dont have the answer, but the post, while fictional, is all too real in every day life.

I think I can make some interesting observations about you from the tone of your post...

Yes, I'm from a middle class family and I have shopped at K-Mart and sometimes shop at Wal-Mart. Nor do I think I hd it hard. I had it extraordinarly easy. You do make a good point though. People like to think they're more poor than they really are,a nd that goes for non-millionaires too.

I'm also from a nuclear family, although it's not nearly as stereotypical as the example you describe.

I might not understand the plight of the poor, but my mother would, as she grew up poor, and even she agrees that some of these "poor misfortunate victims" need to take responsibility. Saying that I don't understand does not change the fact that people have options, and that responsibility is something for which to strive. It's not like they're children.

As far as what you have to say. The tone is all wrong and shows no compassion or real want to help this person or persuade them in any way. I am prochoice, I think it is in the best interest of someone who will ruin their life by starting a family too early to terminate that pregnancy. On the other hand, I have known many who have gone through with the said act only to regret it the rest of their days, as their situation improved faster than they anticipated.

I regret losing things too. Once I sold Final Fantasy III for the SNES (which is as valuable as a blob of cells that isn't even a human being), and later I wanted it again. However, just because I might regret not getting something doesn't mean that I'm going to write checks I'm not sure my ass can cash.

I come from a one parent home. My mother was never on welfare, worked hard for a living at an 11-7 shift as a nurse at a hospital 6 nights a week. We had nothing growing up while my rich father was busy stealing our inheritance and avoiding child support. I can tell you I have seen the point of view from both sides of the spectrum. The rich are blind, selfish, narcisisstic, and quite honestly evil. They usually claim to be good christians too. If you think you are a good christian, have a look at what Jesus had to say about charity.

I like how you stereotype the rich. Seems like you're doing the same thing I'm doing (except I wasn't stereotyping all the poor people, I was focusing on a very specific group of people who like to play the victim when they had so many options), especially since you didn't grow up rich. That means you can't understand the wealthy.

Of course why do I bother, you have eyes, yet cannot see the truth when it is staring back at you. There is something terribly wrong in this world. When you meet Jesus at the pearly gates and he tells you he does not know you. Then you'll understand.

So, you're condemning me to Hell, eh? You know what He said about doing that, right?

Professor Sue, I think all the racist subtext you see shows more about you than it does about me.
Firstly, I might not have ever had a meal with a black person (but it's possible I simply forgot), but I also never had a meal with a variety of people, from Muslims to Buddhists to strippers to homosexuals to celebrities.
Secondly, I have never done any community service that I was not forced to do.
Thirdly, just where do you see all this racist subtext? You do realize that black people are not the only people on welfare and/or in poverty, right? In fact, they aren't even the majority of people on welfare (which makes sense, since they aren't the majority of people in the US).
Fourthly, yes, I do oppose abortion, but abortion's legal, and it is an option for pregnant women unable to afford their child, so unless they're all right with caring for a child they can't necessarily afford (which I support, as long as they accept responsibility) or they oppose abortion, they have no excuse not to have an abortion if they do not want or cannot care for the baby.
Fifthly, so if I oppose abortion, it's because I don't want to give women the right to control her own body, and if I support it, it's because I'm racist?

Juxt, please accept my apologies on my post. I didn't get it. A careful read of your words,your reply, and the commentary by gideon show me I actually am in line with the point you are trying to make more than I really want to admit. The welfare system is broken and there is a problem. Social Security, same thing, its just a BAD system and needs to be done away with.

Sorry man, I didn't get it.But I do now.

Reply By: JuxtapositionPosted: Friday, February 11, 2005

Exactly!  very good and on the point.

Reply By: Dr. Guy Posted: Friday, February 11, 2005 Working in Social services now (networks), I have seen many that did.

I know social workers who look so far down on those who apply that they assume everyone comes from the same cut.

Even now, one of them said that 'you know they aren't going to the job fair' (if we want, we can ask to go to places to check them out). These are the 'rose eyed glasses' she looks through.

The bottom line is that there ARE some who fit just what is said in this post, but most DO NOT and infact hate being, on, around, or in the program. That includeds myself. There are those who just "talk the talk" to make themselves feel better. For example, "all I have to do is this and I am good to go". Are you speaking to those who talk like this, Dr Guy? Most of it is lip service. It is a pretense to make themselves feel good about what is going on in there lives.

Oh and that 2 out of 20 was just a reference, its not an actual statistic. I am just saying out of those who do it for the money and just to be lazy, most do not and REALY do not like being on the program at all.

It is those very few who truely mess it up for those who want legitimate help. Even now at Goodwill (wo helps people on Public Assistance to get work before they are completely on welfare) had to change the rule for how to help people by insuring that those in the program actually go to job fairs, attend classes and use metrocards



That mother depected in this post is actally a person who could be real and can be found in public assistance programs, but they not only do not represent all of us, they mess it up for THEMSELVES and US. The program could be better but the welfare reform that took place has done some good. Its more job oriented, more self reliance focused. There are those who talk trash and wish it was the old way, but actually feel good to have a chance at a real job with a real chance of raises and self importance.

Remember, there is only so much room at the top, then there is the middle, and then there is the bottom. Until we have a system where everyone truely can do something about there lives, most people will be poor no matter HOW HARD THEY WORK. The capitalist system is, so far, the best but it must allow people to advance in pay, lifestyle and more when they put in the work to do it. It is not always the case that it is that, but it should be. One day, when you call someone a bum, it will be because they just didn't work hard at all. We all have to admit that this system as it stands, while the best, makes it so that someone HAS TO BE on the bottom and it has to be MOST of the population.

If the welfare programs (now called Public Assistance), adobtion system, and EDUCATION SYSTEM can be reformed such that everyone gets a chance, then you dipiction of what a welfare mother will be more true than you think.

Oh and off the topic, of which is good by the way...
why don;t you ask to be one of the writers at iPolitica????
Its here:
http://ipolitica.modblog.com/

Please join and start writing!!!!
http://ipolitica.modblog.com/

This is a crude stereo-type but..

In my daily experiences I can usually tell if someone is a Democrat or a Republican (or at least tend sto vote that way) based on a basic personality trait:

Democrats tend (not always) to blame others for the bad things that happen to them.

Republicans (not always) tend to blame themselves for the bad thigns that happen to them.

Are you speaking to those who talk like this, Dr Guy?

No, I am looking at case histories.  Not 100% accurate I assure you, but representative.

This is a crude stereo-type but..

yes it was...in my experiences I've found that Democrats tend (not always) to blame Republicans for the bad things and the Republicans tend (not always) to blame the Democrats.

Juxt, please accept my apologies on my post. I didn't get it. A careful read of your words,your reply, and the commentary by gideon show me I actually am in line with the point you are trying to make more than I really want to admit. The welfare system is broken and there is a problem. Social Security, same thing, its just a BAD system and needs to be done away with. Sorry man, I didn't get it.But I do now.

That's completely all right. It was my fault for the way I presented the whole thing, which I knew was pretty crass.

yes it was...in my experiences I've found that Democrats tend (not always) to blame Republicans for the bad things and the Republicans tend (not always) to blame the Democrats.

I could definitely agree with that!

Oh really? For that matter, the DEATH PENALTY is only advocated by those who themselves have never been EXECUTED. Just like Reagan, you ain't pro-life - you're only pro-birth, and after that you don't give a damn.

lol, I missed this one the first time around. It's cute when people who are PRO abortion start being pissy about a woman's right to choose and critiquing them like this. I guess they have the right to choose abortion, or be degraded.

If it is really a choice, then the woman above is totally correct. Her will, according to our fluffy leftists, is sacrosanct. But this seems to say that if you are financially challenged you HAVE to accept abortion or adoption. Evidently, it isn't really a "choice", it is definite course of action if you meet certain criterea, whether you want to or not. Does that really sound like offering them "choice"?