‘I Ran For Congress Because Of Single Moms On Welfare’

[doggie]

Another quality dildo of a republican spouts his stupidity to all. I mean what a reason to run for office to cut single mothers off.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/01/10 ... s-welfare/

Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX) displayed his sexist colors in a speech about single women and welfare. Specifically, single women and welfare are why he’s in Congress to begin with. According to a video posted on The Raw Story, Gohmert says:

“It began to really eat away with me that in the 60s the federal government, desiring to help poor moms who were dealing with deadbeat dads, decided, ‘We’ll help, we’ll give a check for every child you can have out of wedlock.’â€

Of course, Louie Gohmert says welfare is what created the problem in the first place.

He complains that the war on poverty created the problem of single mothers. Louie Gohmert evidently saw enough women in his courtroom for welfare fraud to decide that women were having babies out of wedlock so they could drop out of high school and collect government checks.

[MrsYoungie]

Have any of these fuckwits ever actually met a person who is trying to live on minimum wage? Or a single mom trying to raise a child? Have they ever had to decide between groceries or rent? Have they ever even lived on a budget? And no, college on daddy's allowance doesn't count.

[Cleopatra7]

Welfare fraud is actually pretty rare, as the governor of Maine found out when he decided to research the topic:

http://bangordailynews.com/2014/01/07/p ... oke-shops/

(link not broken because it's a news site)

[doggie]

These GOP idiots think if there was no welfare programs there would be no poor people and everyone would be working. kind of like if there were no abortion clinics there would be no abortions. the GOP can't seem to even understand history and see what has happened in the past. there have always been poor and always been single mothers.

[FloraKitty35]

Louie Gohmert gives me the creeps, but at the rate the GOP is going he could get the VP spot on the ticket in 16.

[doggie]

of course it not be all the republican programs that benefit business and not people cut wages and education and birth control and yada yada yada.

[artdecades]

i am actually shaking with how angry this makes me. these assholes see women as nothing more than breeding vessels, and then create these crazy lies about women on welfare having 15 kids just to collect money. They can't have it both ways.

and in the end of that video when he said "why not give them daycare". What does he think people are doing with welfare? Also, is he suggesting that daycare become a public service like public schools? cuz I thought his type wanted to defund public institutions like that since is evil socialism

[Gerialc]

Just skimming over the thread title, my first thought was, "Oh, how nice. They ran for congress to help single moms." How mistaken I was.

[doggie]

I know it is hard to get all the info in a title. I should have put not at the end.

[chissprincess]

Aww, come on now. Comparing this guy to a dildo is an insult to fine dildos everywhere. They certainly don't deserve such slander.

I genuinely don't understand why these people have such a problem with welfare and other forms of social safety nets. Are they really buried that deeply in their little privileged bubbles? I fear the answer is yes but there's a part of my soul that hasn't gone all black and cynical yet, I guess.

[doggie]

I am sorry yes dildos have more uses then this idiot. The GOP hates the poor but yet the poor support them even while they make their lives worse go figure.

[crazyforkate]

The fact is, if there's a program out there that benefits people in any way, it's going to be abused. If it's abused extensively? Fix it up. If there are a few bad apples? Deal with them and leave the program alone. Way too many people need it, in this case...

[Childless]

People like this guy really irk me. Ok, if you're going to take away welfare, what's your solution for keep people out of severe poverty? There are never going to be enough high paying jobs for everyone. Some people are going to end up working at fast food restaurants and retail stores. Is his solution to just let children starve to death? To just accept the higher crime rate that will undoubtedly happen when people are desperate to feed, clothe, and house their children? To sit back and watch while the U.S. begins to look like a third world country where massive amounts of people forage through trash bins for food, live on the streets, and beg for money from every passerby? Seriously, what is this guy's plan for handling the consequences of repealing welfare? What, he has none? Shocker.

[Cleopatra7]

People like this guy really irk me. Ok, if you're going to take away welfare, what's your solution for keep people out of severe poverty? There are never going to be enough high paying jobs for everyone. Some people are going to end up working at fast food restaurants and retail stores. Is his solution to just let children starve to death? To just accept the higher crime rate that will undoubtedly happen when people are desperate to feed, clothe, and house their children? To sit back and watch while the U.S. begins to look like a third world country where massive amounts of people forage through trash bins for food, live on the streets, and beg for money from every passerby? Seriously, what is this guy's plan for handling the consequences of repealing welfare? What, he has none? Shocker.

I'm sure he'd just say it's the poor people's fault for not staying in school so they could get a better job. I'm sure he probably also wants to gut education too.

[twinmama]

What is it about some people and fighting to take food and shelter away from those in need?! I mean really, aren't there better things to legislate about? Like getting food and shelter TO those in need? Even if someone IS a horrible, lazy, welfare getting person with no job or ambition, they still deserve food.

[doggie]

It seems to be a new form of Christianity where the rich are rewarded and as usual the poor are fucked.

[GolightlyGrrl]

Yes, there are moochers who don't want to work and just want to collect a so-called hand-out. But these people are in the minority. Most people accepting any type of public assistance are working, sometimes at more than one job. Some are in school. I'd love this douchebag to say this bullshit to one of my co-workers who was abandoned by her partner and is now on food stamps. This woman is one of the hardest working people I have ever met. She gets things done! She is not a lazy, and she is a devoted mom who is truly focused on her kids.

Gohmert reminds me a bit of local conservative commentator Charlie Sykes. This ass rants against women on welfare, yet his first wife had to go on food stamps because Charlie wasn't paying child support. Charlie also cheated on his first two wives. So much for conservative family values.

And could we please look into corporate welfare? Please?

[RachelB]

Just skimming over the thread title, my first thought was, "Oh, how nice. They ran for congress to help single moms." How mistaken I was.

Yup-- that was my first thought, too. Running for office is a pain in the ass. The only thing that would make me consider it would be having a good and feasible idea to improve access to social services that I couldn't introduce into public discussion some other way.

Demonizing parents who are making the best of a bad situation is a problem. Employers not offering adequate parental leave is a problem. Not offering better child-care solutions for low-income parents who want to work is a problem. Single moms on welfare are not themselves the problem.

[doggie]

Yes, there are moochers who don't want to work and just want to collect a so-called hand-out. But these people are in the minority. Most people accepting any type of public assistance are working, sometimes at more than one job. Some are in school. I'd love this douchebag to say this bullshit to one of my co-workers who was abandoned by her partner and is now on food stamps. This woman is one of the hardest working people I have ever met. She gets things done! She is not a lazy, and she is a devoted mom who is truly focused on her kids.

Gohmert reminds me a bit of local conservative commentator Charlie Sykes. This ass rants against women on welfare, yet his first wife had to go on food stamps because Charlie wasn't paying child support. Charlie also cheated on his first two wives. So much for conservative family values.

And could we please look into corporate welfare? Please?

it really is a joke if you make around 150k a year you pay around 40.00 for various welfare services in your taxes. but you pay over 400.00 for corporate welfare. That welfare does not benefit the economy at all it does not create new jobs it only makes the corporations richer and can cause job loss. Were welfare actually increases spending and improves the economy.

[GolightlyGrrl]

it really is a joke if you make around 150k a year you pay around 40.00 for various welfare services in your taxes. but you pay over 400.00 for corporate welfare. That welfare does not benefit the economy at all it does not create new jobs it only makes the corporations richer and can cause job loss. Were welfare actually increases spending and improves the economy.

Thanks for this info, Doggie. Our local news media loves to whip up its viewers (esp. the conservatives) will tales of individual welfare fraud here in Wisconsin (very minor), yet corporate welfare and assorted corporate malfeasance get a barely a mention. We had a local CEO donate funds illegally to a local candidate (Republican, of course) cheating some of his employees. I think only one TV newscast covered it and the attitude was, "Oh, well, shit happens."

[louisa05]

What is it about some people and fighting to take food and shelter away from those in need?! I mean really, aren't there better things to legislate about? Like getting food and shelter TO those in need? Even if someone IS a horrible, lazy, welfare getting person with no job or ambition, they still deserve food.

My nephew's mother is that person. She truly is. For a variety of reasons, her unassisted free ride has ended (among them nephew starting college and her child support from my brother ending and her brother no longer being able to give her money). She is now trying to get on disability and is getting a lot of other assistance. My nephew visited her over Christmas and told us that if she can't get enough assistance, he may drop out of college to live with her and get a job to try to support her. His half-sister has already done that very thing, but her minimum wage 30 hour a week job is not cutting it and he thinks maybe he could do construction or something that pays more than minimum wage.

So there you go...taking benefits away from the laziest, I think, would ultimately just contribute to the cycle of poverty. If taxpayers pay his lazy mother's way long enough for him to finish college, one more person might be able to break out of it. I don't like the idea that she gets a free ride, but...

[YPestis]

My nephew's mother is that person. She truly is. For a variety of reasons, her unassisted free ride has ended (among them nephew starting college and her child support from my brother ending and her brother no longer being able to give her money). She is now trying to get on disability and is getting a lot of other assistance. My nephew visited her over Christmas and told us that if she can't get enough assistance, he may drop out of college to live with her and get a job to try to support her. His half-sister has already done that very thing, but her minimum wage 30 hour a week job is not cutting it and he thinks maybe he could do construction or something that pays more than minimum wage.

So there you go...taking benefits away from the laziest, I think, would ultimately just contribute to the cycle of poverty. If taxpayers pay his lazy mother's way long enough for him to finish college, one more person might be able to break out of it. I don't like the idea that she gets a free ride, but...

Well, wouldn't it be more productive for society to just help the nephew pay for college through grants? Otherwise, the mother is essentially holding her son hostage. If the son finishes college and becomes a productive citizen, then he can care for his mother until her dying days without society's aid. We have a finite amount of resources. Shouldn't priority be given to those willing to help themselves?

I have worked with lazy people as well through the county hospital system. While I think it's horrible we give money to people who make and continue to make poor decisions, it makes no sense to deprive their children because they have idiot parents. That said, my generosity has a limit.

I have met plenty of poor, but hardworking people who try to do right. It's insulting and unfair to continually give to lazy people when there's a vast need from those trying to better themselves. How about diverting money onto those actively trying to look for a job? Why should we feel continually expand welfare to lazy, able bodied people when plenty of people go without money for school or healthcare who are trying to become a productive citizen? It's your nephew's decision to want to drop out of school to help his mother, it's his mother's fault for not wanting to help herself, not our welfare system's. At a certain point, the welfare system becomes a lifestyle and no longer a temporary clutch. I draw the line at anyone who has no dependents to support and no health problems. I work with many illegal migrant workers who cannot access the welfare system and they find jobs somehow.....

Life for poor people will never "the same" as for the middle class and wealthy. I think welfare should try to provide basics for poor kids, but I don't think we should try to replicate a middle class lifestyle. Being poor shouldn't mean going hungry or living in a homeless shelter, but it may mean having to work during college, or make do with second hand toys.

I'm not talking from a privileged vantage point either. My parents were struggling immigrants and my parents had to spend many late nights at the lab instead of coming home to see their young daughter. I played with toys bought from junk sales and didn't get presents on holidays or go on nice vacations most years. I also had to get scholarships for college. It's not easy but this country provides with opportunities if one is willing to work hard.

Not everyone will be successful in life so I favor a welfare system to help those get back on their feet. However, I feel very little sympathy for those in this country who refuse to take advantage of the opportunities afforded to them. I think of my family back in the old country who work and work and work and have much less to show for it because they live in a third world country. If they were afforded even the same opportunities as poor Americans, they would go much further. Welfare should be for those that are down on their luck, have dependents to care for and can't stretch their pay that far, and the disabled. It shouldn't become a permanent thing for healthy individuals, and it shouldn't be encouraged for those unwilling to put forth effort.

[louisa05]

Well, wouldn't it be more productive for society to just help the nephew pay for college through grants? Otherwise, the mother is essentially holding her son hostage. If the son finishes college and becomes a productive citizen, then he can care for his mother until her dying days without society's aid. We have a finite amount of resources. Shouldn't priority be given to those willing to help themselves?

I have worked with lazy people as well through the county hospital system. While I think it's horrible we give money to people who make and continue to make poor decisions, it makes no sense to deprive their children because they have idiot parents. That said, my generosity has a limit.

I have met plenty of poor, but hardworking people who try to do right. It's insulting and unfair to continually give to lazy people when there's a vast need from those trying to better themselves. How about diverting money onto those actively trying to look for a job? Why should we feel continually expand welfare to lazy, able bodied people when plenty of people go without money for school or healthcare who are trying to become a productive citizen? It's your nephew's decision to want to drop out of school to help his mother, it's his mother's fault for not wanting to help herself, not our welfare system's. At a certain point, the welfare system becomes a lifestyle and no longer a temporary clutch. I draw the line at anyone who has no dependents to support and no health problems. I work with many illegal migrant workers who cannot access the welfare system and they find jobs somehow.....

Life for poor people will never "the same" as for the middle class and wealthy. I think welfare should try to provide basics for poor kids, but I don't think we should try to replicate a middle class lifestyle. Being poor shouldn't mean going hungry or living in a homeless shelter, but it may mean having to work during college, or make do with second hand toys.

I'm not talking from a privileged vantage point either. My parents were struggling immigrants and my parents had to spend many late nights at the lab instead of coming home to see their young daughter. I played with toys bought from junk sales and didn't get presents on holidays or go on nice vacations most years. I also had to get scholarships for college. It's not easy but this country provides with opportunities if one is willing to work hard.

Not everyone will be successful in life so I favor a welfare system to help those get back on their feet. However, I feel very little sympathy for those in this country who refuse to take advantage of the opportunities afforded to them. I think of my family back in the old country who work and work and work and have much less to show for it because they live in a third world country. If they were afforded even the same opportunities as poor Americans, they would go much further. Welfare should be for those that are down on their luck, have dependents to care for and can't stretch their pay that far, and the disabled. It shouldn't become a permanent thing for healthy individuals, and it shouldn't be encouraged for those unwilling to put forth effort.

It doesn't work that way for my nephew. Federal financial aid, after the first year of college, is based on whichever parent contributes the most to the student's expenses. That is my brother who makes really good money. For his freshman year, he was able to use his mother's zero income (because she was the custodial parent) and qualify for the grants you speak of. But for the next three years, he has to report his dad's upper middle class income and will not qualify for any of them.

And grants or no grants, his notion of dropping out to help her is a sense of obligation to her immediate needs not looking to the future. Believe me, our family is all but screaming at him to not even consider such a thing. But she is his mother and she is living in a house with no heat and he feels guilty for not doing something about it.