Friday, July 13, 2012


You just can't make this stuff up:

The government has been targeting Spanish speakers with radio “novelas” promoting food stamp usage as part of a stated mission to increase participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or food stamps.
Each novela, comprising a 10-part series called “PARQUE ALEGRIA,” or “HOPE PARK,” presents a semi-dramatic scenario involving characters convincing others to get on food stamps, or explaining how much healthier it is to be on food stamps.
The majority of the episodes end with the announcer encouraging the listener to tune in again to see if the skeptic applies for benefits or learns to understand the importance of food stamps to their health.

Problem 1: everyone knows America is in the throes of economic problems.  Is this really the best use of taxpayer dollars?  To advertise for food stamps??  Can there be any better illustration of how Obama and liberals like him want to cause more people to become dependent upon government for everything, even the most basic necessities of life?

Problem 2: in Spanish?  I mean, come on.  Isn't this a bit of a slap in the face to Hispanics?  It's basically saying that they're all incapable of taking care of themselves and thus need to rely on the government for sustenance, and that's simply not true.  Also, the entire premise of a soap opera geared solely toward building dependency on food stamps seems really...well, insulting.  Do they really think Hispanics are this shallow and gullible?  Or is this just another shameless political ploy to illegal immigrants to join up and support him at the polls?  Never mind Obama granting millions of them de facto amnesty all by himself -- just months after publicly stating that that was unconstitutional -- I guess he felt like he needed to go one step further and get them not only in the country but also living comfortably on the taxpayer's dime (despite most Americans being firmly against his immigration policies).

But this is how liberals view everyone: as helpless victims who can't do anything for themselves, and thus they need the government to do everything for them.  That's completely untrue, but that's how they view things.

Another great example is the reaction to Mitt Romney's speech to the NAACP  earlier in the week.  His full speech is here:

It's about 24 minutes long, but the first three minutes will give you a great flavor of the whole thing.  Notice the lackluster applause when Romney talks about raising up the middle class and those who need jobs.  It's there, but hardly enthusiastic.  I find it interesting how he lays out a whole bunch of numbers that show how the African American community is suffering worse than everyone else in an effort to show that equality of opportunity isn't what's being delivered by the Obama administration.  It gets really interesting at about 11:30, when he promises to repeal Obamacare.  The crowd boos, but Romney rallies to explain the bottom line: jobs.  Obama isn't providing them, but he can.  From the reaction of the crowd, however, it's not all that clear whether the NAACP wants them or not.  Jump in there and's a shockingly effective expository explanation from a Republican.

Oh, and by the way...Obama didn't have time for the NAACP, so he sent VP Joe Biden instead.  I guess he feels like he doesn't need to worry about the votes of African Americans, and he may be right to think that, but even die-hard liberals are questioning the decision.  Of course, all those numbers Romney laid out about the extra steep slope for African Americans isn't making it much easier to appear before them, either.

But neither the NAACP nor the liberal punditry liked Romney's speech.  They called it insulting and demeaning, pointed out that it was negatively received, and (naturally) racist.  Charlette Stoker Manning, the Chairwoman of Women in the NAACP, said this:
"I believe his vested interests are in white Americans," ... "You cannot possibly talk about jobs for black people at the level he's coming from. He's talking about entrepreneurship, savings accounts — black people can barely find a way to get back and forth from work." me crazy, but she sure doesn't have much of an opinion of black people's abilities to excel, create businesses, and succeed, does she?

The bottom line here is that the majority of this crowd has been so thoroughly entrenched in liberal government largesse and dependency for so long that when a candidate comes in and talks to them as responsible adults capable of independent thought and genuine achievement, they can't handle it.  They reject it out of hand due to the letter behind the candidate's name, and they declare that no, in fact, they are not responsible adults capable of independent thought and genuine achievement.  It's truly, truly sad what liberalism has done here.  The NAACP's blind support of Obama indicates that they seem to be more interested in slandering rich white guys than in actually improving things for African Americans in this nation.

Speaking of which, I think it's pertinent to note that the NAACP was founded by rich white guys:
You know, one of the biggest lies that the news media and the rest of the Democrat Party is foisted on us for the past 50-years-plus is the lie that the Democrat Party is the savior of blacks and all minorities. 
Do you realize Democrats were the ones who started the KKK? 
You don't find Republican senators that were members of the KKK. But Robert "Sheets" Byrd (Democrat-West Virginia) was a Grand Wizard or Kleagle or whatever. He was a recruiter for the KKK. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan. Democrats were the ones who turned fire hoses and police dogs on civil rights marchers in Alabama. Not just Alabama, all across the South. Bull Connor was a Democrat. Democrats were the people standing in the schoolhouse doors refusing to admit black students that wanted an equal education with white students.
It was Democrats who filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 
It was Democrats that LBJ had problems with, trying to get the Civil Rights Act passed. Now the Democrats have the gall to accuse Republicans of working against blacks and other minorities. As for Biden and Reverend Wright, we don't really care what Biden learned from Reverend Wright. We want to know what Obama learned from Reverend Wright. The KKK was a wing of the Democrat Party. It was the militant wing of the Democrat Party. 
The KKK was created to stop blacks and whites from voting for Republicans. The earliest targets of the KKK were Republicans! How many of you people are probably shocked to hear this? This is one of the great reversals of reality that has taken place in this nation's history. A greater percentage of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act in the Senate in 1964 than Democrats, and yet look at what everybody thinks! John Lewis -- who, as he describes it, "got beat upside the head" at the Selma march -- got beat upside the head by Democrats. 
John Lewis marched with Dr. King and got beat up by Democrats. He had the fire hoses turned on him by Democrats. He had the dogs turned loose on him by Democrats. He was chased down by the Ku Klux Klan. It was Democrats that killed Emmett Till. It wasn't Republicans. You'd never know it.

Huh.  How about that!  And now look at where we are today, with Republicans again trying to set African Americans free, to widen the doorways to success and achievement based on their own merits, and promising not equality of outcomes but rather equality of opportunity.  And once again, it is Democrats who are clawing at the ankles of those African Americans who are trying to rise up, pulling them back down like an anchor, intent on keeping them mindlessly in place.

No comments:

Post a Comment