A Letter From the Waco Tribune Herald on Nov 18, 2010 by one misguided youth

79

By d.william

Under the Eye of God

Wacko in Waco Texas


I recently received an email going around the www written by a 21 year old female "who gets it".

I will leave it intact, but with modifications that reflect the reality of life, not the views of the GOP rhetoric that it is filled with. I am a senior citizen with many more years of experience under my belt than this 21 year old, and with a better grasp of reality and hopefully with a little more common sense, and ability to look at life with a broader perspective. Although a few of these ideas are quite thought provoking they need to reflect the real world. So here goes.

  • (My responses and clarifications will be in parenthesis, in italics, and underscored when applicable)

------------------------------------------------>>-
This was in the Waco Tribune Herald, Waco, TX., Nov. 18, 2010:

This was written by a 21 yr old female who gets it. It's her future she is worried about and this is how she feels about the social welfare big government state that she is being forced to live in! These solutions are just common sense in her opinion.

> Put me in charge . . .
> Put me in charge of food stamps. I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.

  • (This has some merit. The use of food stamps should require some discretion on what they are used for. Although the meaning is well intended, there are folks on food stamps that are unable to work, unable to cook, or even unable to store such quantities above what can be used in a reasonable period of time. It should be explicit about: not for the purchase of junk foods, alcohol, tobacco, lottery tickets, stamps, etc... but food choices are based on the individuals tastes, likes, and needs; as some people cannot digest certain foods or may be allergic to others.).


> Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligation's. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine and document all tattoos and piercings. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, smoke or get tats and piercings, then get a job.

  • (Here her knowledge of medicaid is not quite accurate, logical, or adult. Medicaid is mainly for the use of the elderly, or those who are disabled. The government cannot legally require the disabled or the elderly to have tubal ligation's or birth control implants. The use of prescription, or over the counter drugs, or the use of alcohol, cannot be dictated by the government, and has nothing to do with medicaid. Even the use of cigarettes cannot be taken away from anyone when they are legally sold over the counter. So this portion about medicaid is inappropriate for anyone to suggest. The abuse of medicaid or medicare is NOT by the recipients of it, but by those providers who put in bogus claims, and pad their bills with the intent to defraud the government who provides no oversight to stop those false claims.)


> Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks?
> You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your "home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.

  • (Actually has some merit with this one. There are no current restrictions regarding upkeep, or maintanance, etc... Anything proccurred prior to moving into Government housing cannot be taken away from those who are in need, simply because someone thinks they do not deserve to have them. There should be some restrictions, however, on the purchase of new and "expensive" items. Televisions sets, computers, phones, and other "conveniences" are basic necessities in our current life style, and are often required in looking for work, raising children and providing basic needs.)


> In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a "government" job. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you. We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the âcommon good..

  • (I am assuming that this paragraph is a continuation of "living in government housing"? People who live in government housing are either unable to work (due to mental or physical impairment), or work in jobs that pay minimum wages or less, or have small children they must care for and using sarcasm regarding selling high end properties while living in government housing is silly, demeaning, and uncalled for).



> Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules.. Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem.

  • (I am not quite sure what this paragraph references, but it sounds to me like the remarks about "taking someone else's money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem" is being misdirected toward the poor and needy when in reality it is certainly the descriptive narrative for big business executives.) ?


> If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.

  • (This paragraph above is totally unjustified, insulting and just plain ludicrous. Making assumptions that the poor, or the infirm, are products of their own choices is stereotyping at its worst. The majority of the poor and homeless are not there by their own volition, but are victims of circumstances beyond their control, victims of crimes, sexually, physically, or emotionally abused and left on the streets to fend for themselves. When we start turning our back on those less fortunate than ourselves, or blaming the victims, we have lost our compassion, our humanity, and our decency. This seems to be the new wave of thought from the Republican (and the new tea party) government, the wealthy, and those who became self reliant by stepping on the poor and middle class.) (This kind of generalized statement that reflects the mistakes of drug/alcohol addicts is also inappropriate when describing those unfortunate people who require assistance just to be able to afford basic essentials.)


> AND While you are on Govât subsistence, you no longer can VOTE! Yes that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Government welfare check. If you want to vote, then get a job.

  • (This is unconstitutional and serves no purpose. You can not remove a person's right to vote, or any other basic human rights just because you disapprove of people who have less than you do. This is the current mentality of the GOP to remove basic voting rights of those who are less fortunate, for fear that they might just be voting for simple democracy, equality, justice and a better way of life for themselves and others in their situations.) (i.e.,the current GOP drive to suppress votes of the poor, elderly, and college students, in the next election, that we see daily on the news programs on T.V. )


> Now, if you have the guts - PASS IT ON...

  • (And lastly, I do have the guts to PASS THIS ON, not because you, the writer, or you, the reader who agrees with this writer, is correct, but because you are part of the problems of society instead of part of the solutions. Criticizing and demeaning the less fortunate, seems to be the order of the day for the new political environment, while making compassion, caring, social welfare needs, and helping out the less fortunate seem like something perverse or evil.)


  • (I can only say just how disappointing it is to see, and hear, this younger generation coming up without any sense of empathy, compassion or understanding of what being a victim of the system is truly like. We are NOT always the cause of our own misfortunes.
  • Perhaps one day those who find fault with the less fortunate among us will find themselves in those very shoes.

by d.william 12/10/2011

I've got the Welfare Blues

Comments

TheManWithNoPants profile image

TheManWithNoPants Level 7 Commenter 5 months ago

D.

There has to be a balance, and you're one of the guys I trust to balance me out. I see the unexcusable waste and abuse of our welfare system all around me and fear what that waste and abuse will mean to people who have no other choice but to accept help. It's not that we shouldn't take care of those who honestly can't fend for themselves. It's just that we can't afford the abuse. On the other hand, you fear us, as well you should. Without you to balance us out, we'd get carried away, I'm sorry to say. There is always a war going on inside of me between the way I wish things were, and the way they are. I dunno. I may have said this all the wrong way, but don't mean it to be bad. I need to take some time off I think.

jim

d.william profile image

d.william Hub Author 5 months ago

Jim:

thanks for taking the time to read and comment. And you are absolutely correct. As with most of our government programs, they were born out of good intentions, but there are always those who take unfair, or undue, advantages and spoil it for everyone else.

The old adage that one rotten apple can spoil the whole barrel has never been truer than what we see going on in Washington today. And it IS NOT limited to one side or the other.

The great problems of abuse of funding must be addressed without political bullshit attached to them. These problems are not partisan issues, but the major problem is that our current stand off in Washington makes everything a political war between the parties. They have lost sight of the reasons they were elected in the first place: To serve the American People. The new concept seems to be: screw the American people. And all efforts are directed towards defeating their political opponents. BOTH parties are equally guilty of this bull shit. But it moves from the Washington arena to the general public and continues to escalate between the individuals of either party.

I can see no solution to this current dilemma except for a 3rd party to arise that is bipartisan, or centrist in its philosophy. The Tea Party IS NOT that solution.

I am hearing some good things about a new party arising called: the Justice Party. I will do some research on what they are all about.

This article was only meant to show just how biased the younger generation has become, and how blaming the unfortunate and needy in our society is taking precedence over putting the blame where it truly belongs: Politicians, and the Plutocratic faction that rules our country today.

Dee

TheManWithNoPants profile image

TheManWithNoPants Level 7 Commenter 5 months ago

Dee,

Funny, I just introduced the idea of having my organization make the transition to a third party. I agree the Tea Party is far, far,far from being the third party answer. We could not be in more agreement there!

I want to get some work done with The Housefire Project so as to have some track record to fall back on. If you google it, you'll find there are dozens of third parties out there. It can be a money maker for people who don't give a damn about the country, while others just aren't built on any kind of solid foundation other than inspiration. We have plenty of inspiration at The Project. Now we need some positive results to build on.

Your third party idea is good. It comes down to this question in my opinion; Which can we do the quickest? Clean up two very old corrupt parties, or build a viable new one?

This simple brain of mine is smoking my friend. One thing I can guarantee .. we'll have an impact which ever way we go.

jim

Angela Blair profile image

Angela Blair Level 7 Commenter 5 months ago

As with most other citizens today, I also find myself in a quandry about government benefits. I see, first hand, abuse of the welfare system daily from individuals to doctors who run unnecessary tests to make additional profit from Medicare/Medicaid. As a senior citizen perhaps some of my ideas are outdated and archiac. I can understand, however, this young person's stand. It's people their age who are going to suffer the most -- down the line -- from our welfare system being so flawed. Can it be fixed? The question's obvious but the answer's nebulous. Great and well written HUB. Best, Sis

d.william profile image

d.william Hub Author 5 months ago

TheManWithNoPants:

In my opinion? A viable third party that is offering middle of the road ideas would certainly capture the public faster than what is currently going on in Washington. If you do decide to create a third party the most important concept is NOT to side with either of the current parties in their current forms of radicalization. Both of them have become quite distasteful in the minds of 99.9% of the American people. I did visit your site, but there were some people associated that were radically inclined. Moderation is the key to winning these days, not fanaticism, no religious affiliations, no back stabbing, no empty rhetoric criticizing current parties, gearing policies toward the 99%,and no negative campaigning. Imagine how pleasant those traits would be in a campaign for a change. I think any party that could offer these things would take off like a house on fire (no pun intended).

d.william profile image

d.william Hub Author 5 months ago

Angela Blair:

I agree with you 100%. The answer to the question: can current government policies be fixed? The answer is a resounding YES. The current politicians are trying to kiss up to everyone that is influential that they can provide nothing of substance to offer in attempting to 'fix' things, for fear of slighting one of their benefactors; so they just do a lot of double talk and do nothing at all.

Take the Affordable Health Care Bill for instance: The GOP is hell bent on repealing this bill, when in fact it has already benefited the American people in numerous ways, and their are NO 'staggering costs' to the taxpayer as they argue in order to propitiate the sympathy of the American people.

The objection by most is the clause about mandating people to buy some kind of health insurance coverage. Does the government have the right to mandate this? Well, there were certainly no objections to the mandating of insurance coverage for getting a drivers license, purchasing a mortgage, purchasing an automobile, or many other instances of forcing people to purchase insurance coverage.

And while i am on a rant about the insurance thing - that infuriating ad on TV by Huckabee about the Democrats forcing this onto the American people, is exactly what the current GOP party is doing on a state to state basis by changing the laws in favor of the wealthy, without the consent of the American people. Now which is worse? Being "crammed" by the GOP or being "crammed" by the Democrats? And i use the word 'crammed' as a polite colloquialism for what i would REALLY like to say.

The great question is what the supreme court will decide when the issue of the Affordable Health Care Act goes before them. They are obviously going to be caught between a rock and a hard place because they are certainly pro corporation (as proven by their decision to deem corporations the same status as an individual) and mandating people to purchase insurance will surely benefit the insurance companies. While on the other hand they are also pro Republican and quite obviously anti democracy. So, who do they slight? (Note i say slight, and no what is legally or morally just): Do they slight their corporate friends, or do they support their party of choice?

TheManWithNoPants profile image

TheManWithNoPants Level 7 Commenter 5 months ago

Dee,

Re visit our web site. I'm the founder and I'm growing daily. The Glen Beck, and Ron Paul thing were rookie mistakes. That's been gone for quite a while, and so is the CNN and Fox News feeds. Check out our new look and "Big Eight Initiatives." I'm happy to say that the moderate left now make up almost thirty percent of our membership and that is growing. The changes that have to be made ARE radical, but they are neither right or left. They're just smart. I try to keep my center right personal ideas separate from the organization. I have some strong feelings on this election for instance, but those feelings don't spill into the organization.

I'm going to do a piece on negative campaigning soon. I think you'll like it.

As always Dee, I respet your opinion, and there is much more that we agree on than we disagree on.

jim

d.william profile image

d.william Hub Author 5 months ago

http://themanwithnopants.hubpages.com/

Thanks. And in view of those changes, i would be happy to revisit your web site. Funny, i was just entertaining the thought of doing a hub on negative campaigning as well. But i will defer to you for that one.

TheManWithNoPants profile image

TheManWithNoPants Level 7 Commenter 5 months ago

D.

No, do the hub. It'll be a while before I do mine and it will be a different angle anyway I'm sure. Mine is going to be on the sad truth of why the negative way is the only way to win. ummmm .. if two crooks are competing for a job and don't have mush positive to stand on, the only way to make themselves look good is by making the other guy look horrible by contrast. In marketing, if the only way you can move your product is to bad mouth the competition, it means your product doesn't have enough merit to close the deal standing on it's own. Anyway, that'll be my angle. :/

jim

d.william profile image

d.william Hub Author 5 months ago

Wow. That is great. Can't wait to read yours. Mine was not going in that direction.

keith stone 3 months ago

she isnt directing this to all people on medicare..

she isnt directing this to all people on low income housing.

she isnt directing this to all people on welfare.

she is directing it to the people who abuse the system and as far as I can see, its more abuse than actual need..

I live in a new development where 10% is low income (40B program)

just like she said.. They got some of the biggest houses in here and these rang from 4 to 500k. The people on this program have expensive cars.. those that have middle of the road vehicles have other toys instead. One family has..

3 cars.

snow mobiles

a boat

motorcycle

wave runner

and thats only what I see on the outside..!!!

so she is only pointing out the scammers and that fact of the matter is, the majority of people are totally scamming the system.

d.william profile image

d.william Hub Author 3 months ago

keith stone:

thank you for reading and your comments. I do agree that there are a lot of abuses to any public assistance program. But you cannot blame the program for that abuse. It is like throwing the baby out with the dirty bath water. The problem is in the delivery of those programs, they are done with good intentions by people who know little about how to set them up to avoid and weed out those scammers. But it is not only with government programs that the weasels find a way to circumvent the good intentions.

Most of the time these programs are set up to fail for whatever ulterior motive might be intended, for some kind of payback for supporting the originators of those bills.

Take for instance the concept of the separation of church and state. Religious entities pay no taxes, yet they donate big bucks to candidates that are willing to promote hatred and bigotry in the name of their beliefs. There should be no representation without taxation. And yet, the Bush administration saw fit to reward those religious thieves with his unilateral passing of a bill that would allow religious "businesses" to access government money without any oversight as to what they do with our tax dollars that they take for free. This is blatant abuse of taxpayer money, and just one small example of how our elected officials stick it to us (the People who put them in that office). Corruption runs rampant and there is no one to oversee the actions of those corrupt politicians, or no safeguards in place to oust the bastards when they do their dirty underhanded tricks to us.

Punishing everyone who actually needs assistance is certainly not the answer to any government problems of the minority who scam the system. You state "the majority of people are totally scamming the system" referencing the poor and needy, and yet nothing is ever spoken about the wealthy corporate CEOs who scam the government out of billions/trillions of dollars of tax payer money every year. As long as it is for payback for money that bought them their seats in government it is deemed appropriate?

In Florida recently this idiot governor unilaterally passed an edict that everyone on public funds be tested for drugs as a prerequisite for getting needed assistance. Thank goodness there were judges in this state that overrode that edict. Especially when it was found that only 1% to 2% of the recipients of public assistance uses drugs (for recreational purposes). He also closed all pain clinics in this state because he believed that the majority of those in pain were lying just to get drugs. A belief that was unsubstantiated with facts. The last thing we need in this country is a government that sees the people in general as a threat to their free use of our tax payer dollars.

Submit a Comment
Members and Guests

Sign in or sign up and post using a hubpages account.



    • No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked
    • Comments are not for promoting your Hubs or other sites

    Please wait working