Again what race of legal citizens are negatively impacted by illegal immigrationLOL, is this a response to Thomas Sowell?
But I'm the wracist too funny
I guess you missed that letter I pasted as you missed who said this
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Again what race of legal citizens are negatively impacted by illegal immigrationLOL, is this a response to Thomas Sowell?
There were some instances where the enormity of the challenge forced Obama to impose separation. But this was only temporary and his workers quickly reunited families. This is in stark contrast to Trump's separation policy.
Feel free to extract rosey poll scenarios.
Primarily of his own making.And president President Trump never faced......"lnstances where the enormity of the challenge"?
President Trump made illegal aliens illegally enter the countryPrimarily of his own making.
LOL, is this a response to Thomas Sowell?
WrongPrimarily of his own making.
I put him on ignore after he went on a nauseating tangent the other day.Yeah, did my quote of him not show up? Great guess on your part; can't imagine how you knew.
I put on ignore after he went on a nauseating tangent the orher day.
I blame the voters.Wrong
It was the making of president Bush and president Obama
It was president Bush and, president Obama policies that help elect president Trump
I must be doing something right for you to label me a wracistYeah, did my quote of him not show up? Great guess on your part; can't imagine how you knew.
LolHe's on ignore for me right now, too. I'm sure he's posting furiously as we speak. The only reason I saw his earlier nonsense is because I clicked "show ignored content" to see what another poster was responding to.
Lmao ok whatever helps you sleep at nightI blame the voters.
Over the weekend I listen to Sonnies Corner. I never miss it. Without a doubt a must listen tooLBJ’S “WAR ON POVERTY” HURT BLACK AMERICANS
Five Decades After: Black Progress Hurt by Expansion in Government, Welfare
Black Activists Criticize Handout Mentality that Destroyed Traditional Families
Washington, D.C. – Fifty years ago today, before a joint session of Congress, President Lyndon Baines Johnson announced an “unconditional war on poverty in America.” Today, black activists with theProject 21 leadership network are critical of how that war has been waged. They note the expansion of government and a strategy focused on handouts that discourage self-improvement caused more harm than help to the poor.
“Five decades after President Johnson initiated the ‘war’ on poverty, America remains at around the same percentage of people still living in poverty as it did back then. In 1964, the poverty rate was approximately 19 percent. Today, it’s around 15 percent,” said Project 21 spokesman Derryck Green. “Statistics such as these demonstrate the War on Poverty was a continually-mismanaged disaster. That isn’t to say there haven’t been people helped by it. All things considered, however, it’s been a tragedy.”
Green added: “The disastrous effects of the government’s management of anti-poverty initiatives are recognizable across racial lines, but the destruction is particularly evident in the black community. It effectively subsidized the dissolution of the black family by rendering the black man’s role as a husband and a father irrelevant, invisible and — more specifically — disposable. The result has been several generations of blacks born into broken homes and broken communities experiencing social, moral and economic chaos. It fosters an inescapable dependency that primarily, and oftentimes solely, relies on government to sustain livelihoods.”
Federal programs directly resulting from the War on Poverty include Medicare, Medicaid, Head Start, food stamps and enhanced Social Security benefits. At the time, President Johnson boasted, “[t]he richest nation on Earth can afford to win it.” In 1988, President Ronald Reagan noted in his 1988 State of the Union Address that “we waged a war on poverty, and poverty won.” President George H.W. Bush, in his own 1992 State of the Union Address, pointed out: “Welfare was never meant to be a lifestyle; it was never meant to be a habit; it was never supposed to be passed on from generation to generation like a legacy.” Bush’s comment echoed a statement by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who, long before the War on Poverty even began, warned government assistance could be like a “narcotic.”
Commenting on the potential debilitating effects of public assistance, Project 21 Co-Chairman Cherylyn Harley LeBon said: “Although they were conceived with good intentions, the programs of the War on Poverty have ultimately had a negative impact on the lives of black Americans. Even Franklin Roosevelt warned that the welfare state ‘must not become a narcotic and a subtle destroyer of the spirit.'”
LeBon continued: “While some good things did come out of the 1960s, many of these programs — including Head Start — have become ineffective and, some argue, damaging over time. In fact, some of the major disasters plaguing minority communities — including drugs, higher incarceration rates and a rise in unwed mothers — couldn’t have just coincidentally began escalating at the same time. At this point, when we can reflect upon what has happened and what is needed, we should now support and expand policies encouraging small business expansion, improving educational opportunities, and strengthening faith and families.”
Project 21’s Jerome Hudson said: “Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty produced a reality that is horrifyingly different than the one he probably hoped for. Instead of providing a mere safety net for families in need, it effectively replaced the virtues of work and self-reliance with an avalanche of welfare programs nuturing the poor. These welfare programs foster defeatism, disincentivize two-parent homes and set ablaze an American underclass now seemingly trapped in a never-ending cycle of poverty.”
“Fifty years ago, America began the War on Poverty,” said Project 21 Co-Chairman Horace Cooper. “Having spent trillions with little to show for it, it’s clearly time to declare a cease fire. After destroying generations of blacks and all but destroying the black family in total, it is time to try empowerment and personal responsibility.”
“The War on Poverty has arguably destroyed the black nuclear family,” said Project 21’s Christopher Arps. “Roughly 75 percent of black children were born to a married two-parent family when the ‘war’ began in 1964. By 2008, the percentage of black babies born out of wedlock numbered over 72 percent. Today, the rate of unwed motherhood in the black community is more than twice as high as among whites — and almost three times higher than before big government’s grand intervention. And all this comes at a steep financial cost. The federal government has spent an estimated $15 trillion dollars to end poverty. Government reportedly spent $20,610 on every poor individual and $61,830 per poor family in 2012.”
As the 50th anniversary of the War on Poverty is observed, it appears the Obama Administration is effectively doubling down on some of the very concepts of which Project 21 members are critical, including raising the minimum wage, extending unemployment benefits and food stamp enrollment as well as fostering class warfare by focusing on alleged income inequality.
“President Johnson’s War on Poverty, which was being formulated during the Kennedy Administration, is perhaps the only government institution that destroyed and devastated the black American upward mobility and family structure. As an assistant secretary of labor, Daniel Patrick Moynihan warned that the premise and concept of the War on Poverty would be detrimental to black America,” said Project 21’s Charles Butler. “The infamous split between the races that Moynihan predicted has created a deficit between white and black in key areas such as education, income and net worth. Yet we keep doing the same thing repeatedly hoping for a different result.”
You really put posters on ignore?I put him on ignore after he went on a nauseating tangent the other day.
The Cubs getting a dynamic starter would really help me sleep at night.Lmao ok whatever helps you sleep at night
I have only done that a few times, but when a guy posts a concatenation of self-consciously contrived posts, I had little choice. That both Benko and I did that to the same poster suggests there may be some merit to the decision.You really put poster on ignore?
Wow
I have only done that a few times, but when a guy posts a concatenation of self-consciously contrived posts, I had little choice. That both Benko and I did that to the same poster suggests there may be some merit to the decision.
That would have made for a fantastic Twilight Zone episode.That's the one area where this message board is clearly better than the real world -- the ignore button. Wouldn't it be great if we could, in real life, completely ignore everyone who was stupidly popping off about stuff?
No it suggest something else.I have only done that a few times, but when a guy posts a concatenation of self-consciously contrived posts, I had little choice. That both Benko and I did that to the same poster suggests there may be some merit to the decision.
Just call me Busby Berkeley.No it suggest something else.
Your post are not hidden from him are the? Its alittle Berkeleyest.
I have never put a poster on ignore
It must suck to be youThat's the one area where this message board is clearly better than the real world -- the ignore button. Wouldn't it be great if we could, in real life, completely ignore everyone who was stupidly popping off about stuff?
That would have made for a fantastic Twilight Zone episode.
Seriously, Rod Serling would have trouble topping that.Submitted for your approval or at least your analysis: one Thomas Sowell, who, at age forty-one, is the biggest bore on Earth. He holds a ten-year record for the most meaningless words spewed out during a coffee break. And it's very likely that, as of this moment, he would have gone through life in precisely this manner, a dull, argumentative bigmouth who sets back the art of conversation a thousand years. I say he very likely would have except for something that will soon happen to him, something that will considerably alter his existence - and ours. Now you think about that now, because this is The Twilight Zone.
And then when you and benko step out in the real world what a disappointment that must be?Seriously, Rod Serling would have trouble topping that.
For us or the real world?And then when you and benko step out in the real world what a disappointment that must be?
YouFor us or the real world?