Is that a fact that Obama put more people on food stamps or is it careful phrasing, rather than saying he gave more people access to food stamps?

Either way I dont see how giving people food is such a bad thing.

>> ^moodonia:

Is that a fact that Obama put more people on food stamps or is it careful phrasing, rather than saying he gave more people access to food stamps?
Either way I dont see how giving people food is such a bad thing.


The way I'd relay the facts is that the economy started crashing in 2008 (before Obama was elected), and lots of people lost their jobs, and because lots of people lost their jobs there was a sharp increase in the number of people applying for food stamps.

Part of the stimulus bill in 2009 increased the benefits provided by SNAP (aka the "food stamp" program), and made unemployed adults without children eligible for benefits.

So the way I'd put it is "Obama saw more people needing food stamps, and made sure they got them, while also doing his best to fix the mess Wall Street made of the economy."

I think that's missing the forest for the trees though. This comment isn't really about food stamps. It's about floating several racist memes in the birthplace of the Civil War (South Carolina), and then trying to whitewash them as being "truth" or "common sense," even though they're neither true nor sensible.

What a bunch of rubes in the audience.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Wow, the audience loves him.

Netrunner,

While I agree for the most part of your 1st 3 paragraphs I disagree with your last. Its not raciest to trying to provide jobs as apposed to enslaving people into the government system.

netrunner is right about the cause of the increase in foodstamp recipients

but... i also agree with bobknight - your last paragraph has a bit of hyperbole... he's not whitewashing - if anything, newt's words dig him a deeper hole with the left, and even some on the right... but there is a resonance of truth for many - putting things bluntly can be labeled 'racist' but it doesn't necessarily need to be so

imagine a hypothetical scenario wherein herman cain gives a stump speech to a predominately white crowd in a west virginia coal-mining community... he tells them to "stay in school" and stresses the importance of education in bettering one's station in life -- racist?

gingrich's broth of reasoning lacks a necessary dash of empathy to make the recipe for recovery more popularly favorful... that, imho, is why he won't get the nomination

@Diogenes, you have to take anything Newt, or Cain for that matter, says in broader context. To see if what Newt does is racist, apply the double standard test to Newt's own actions and long history. Does Newt go around giving the scores of white neighborhoods/communities/towns that are stricken with unemployment or poverty the same acrid advice and message? Even more, does he brag or boast about doing so?

No.

Show me that video, and I'll buy the first 5 rounds.

His dogwhistle political maneuvers come straight out of the Southern Strategy cookbook.

@longde

you may be right, though i do try my best to see the 'big picture' re looking at things in a broader perspective... you could even say that that's one of my hobbies

forgive me if i don't (probably can't) take up your challenge on providing the asked-for video... though i'll happily buy the rounds myself

i think the media (including youtube, et al) is inherently sensationalist, and as such, gravitates to coverage of what's wrong with the message rather than the basis of the message itself

perhaps this seeming focus on the plight of minorities stems from the basic statistics we have: iirc, there are more whites at or under the poverty level than all minorities combined... yet as a % of total population, they are outnumbered by both hispanics and and african-americans - more sadly (yet perhaps more indicative of newt's focus), is the fact that african-americans outnumber hispanic citizens, yet as a % of total population, the former has more people at or under the poverty line

now, you could take my recitation of those statistics as being 'racist' even though i don't think i am and also don't have a dog in this race

so perhaps newt's message is figuratively loudest where he believes the most help is needed (nation-wise)... but this focus can be skewed to seem a blatant criticism of the race of those affected

here's an 8-year-old quote from gingrich: "It is impossible to maintain civilization with 12-year-olds having babies, 15-year-olds killing each other, 17-year-olds dying of AIDS, and 18-year-olds getting diplomas they can't even read. Yet that is precisely where three generations of Washington-dominated, centralized-government, welfare-state policies have carried us."

taken broadly, many would agree and likely take no offense... but applied to a specific audience of specific ethnicity, would likely seem insensitive

i think newt's been fairly consistent in his views on poverty, which we can trace back to his seminal 'contract with america' in the '80s

but again, i could be wrong...

I don't take recitation of those statistics as being racist in itself. Again, I'm using context. I know people who actually work in poor and ethnic communities that use such stats as a benchmark or as a reason to call folks to positive action.

If he has good at heart, when has Newt actually worked for positive change in this community that he so soundly criticizes? Obama was a community organizer in poor areas of Chicago. As a legislator he sponsored bills that directly helped people in poor areas and people in the black community. So, when he uses such stats--and he actually does have a history of telling all types of crowds to stick to a work ethic--Obama doesn't come off as a ne'er-do-well.

I know people who work at youth outreach centers and soup kitchens in DC. Noone has ever seen ol' Newt drop in to help. I've never heard of him sponsoring a bill to help the poor of DC, though he can rattle off all the problems those people have. As a longtime legislator and one-time speaker of the house and someone who lived in the DC area at least part time, he's had plenty of opportunity to lend a hand, but hasn't chosen to do so.

The guy's a professional speaker, but I've never heard of him browbeating poor whites. Hell, he's in South Carolina; he has plenty of chances to tell white people to get off welfare and food stamps. He could have used the stage in the video to do so. But, no, he has to pick on blacks to play to a white crowd.

Newt has such a well known public, political and legislative history that you don't have to troll youtube to see where he's coming from. The people who gave him a standing ovation certainly know.

>> ^Diogenes:

@longde
you may be right, though i do try my best to see the 'big picture' re looking at things in a broader perspective... you could even say that that's one of my hobbies
forgive me if i don't (probably can't) take up your challenge on providing the asked-for video... though i'll happily buy the rounds myself
i think the media (including youtube, et al) is inherently sensationalist, and as such, gravitates to coverage of what's wrong with the message rather than the basis of the message itself
perhaps this seeming focus on the plight of minorities stems from the basic statistics we have: iirc, there are more whites at or under the poverty level than all minorities combined... yet as a % of total population, they are outnumbered by both hispanics and and african-americans - more sadly (yet perhaps more indicative of newt's focus), is the fact that african-americans outnumber hispanic citizens, yet as a % of total population, the former has more people at or under the poverty line
now, you could take my recitation of those statistics as being 'racist' even though i don't think i am and also don't have a dog in this race
so perhaps newt's message is figuratively loudest where he believes the most help is needed (nation-wise)... but this focus can be skewed to seem a blatant criticism of the race of those affected
here's an 8-year-old quote from gingrich: "It is impossible to maintain civilization with 12-year-olds having babies, 15-year-olds killing each other, 17-year-olds dying of AIDS, and 18-year-olds getting diplomas they can't even read. Yet that is precisely where three generations of Washington-dominated, centralized-government, welfare-state policies have carried us."
taken broadly, many would agree and likely take no offense... but applied to a specific audience of specific ethnicity, would likely seem insensitive
i think newt's been fairly consistent in his views on poverty, which we can trace back to his seminal 'contract with america' in the '80s
but again, i could be wrong...

@Diogenes, by "whitewash" I mean he's trying to make ugly antipathy towards blacks look like altruistic behavior towards blacks through dishonesty.

And while I largely agree with longde, I do have to point out that a big part of the proper context is that Newt was asked about the criticism he's receiving for saying:

"I’m prepared if the NAACP invites me, I’ll go to their convention and talk about why the African American community should demand paychecks and not be satisfied with food stamps."

This seems relevant, Newt was wrong, there was a greater increase of people on food stamps under Bush:

http://factcheck.org/2012/01/newts-faulty-food-stamp-claim/#.TxsIC0BIjvI.twitter