Hillary called people on welfare "deadbeats"

[Cheese Sandwich]

To the left she was a traitor, willing to sell out the women and children she professed to care more about.

"There were people in the White House who said, 'just sign anything,' you know," the New York senator said in an interview. "And I thought that was wrong. We wanted to do it in a way that kept faith with our goals: End welfare as we know it, substitute dignity for dependence, but make work pay."

She sits now in the seat filled then by Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, D-N.Y. The famous expert on poverty and welfare famously predicted that there would be deeper impoverishment, and greater suffering, of perhaps a million more children after welfare revision. Moynihan could not have foreseen the outcome: A robust economy that helped the legislation to work, just about the way it was supposed to.

The welfare rolls have been cut in half. Child poverty has dropped.

Poverty overall is down. Work, overall, is up.

"Now that we've said these people are no longer deadbeats -- they're actually out there being productive -- how do we keep them there?" Clinton said.

http://staugustine.com/stories/041602/opi_646964.shtml

[silvershadow]

1. Well, she did. nt

[Baobab]

8. They used that to sell "progressive liberalisation" of services to the deveoping countries

part of a huge global scam.

[msongs]

2. some people on welfare are deadbeats. I know several of them nt

[Cheese Sandwich]

5. Deadbeats, welfare queens, people faking back injuries.

The country is full up with cheaters right?

/sarcasm

I'm not looking for a president who goes around calling welfare recipients 'deadbeats'.

[Actor]

31. But you will be OK with Trump as president? What planet is this?

[Cheese Sandwich]

35. Where did I say that?

[Loudestlib]

38. .

Profile Information
Member since: Fri Apr 15, 2016, 02:14 PM
Number of posts: 519

"Correct the record"

[Actor]

41. I dont know what you are implying but if you knew who I was and what I do

for the liberal cause you would be embarrassed and ashamed, i hope

[Loudestlib]

44. I'm not really human.

On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

[cali]

59. The plaintive, wholly unverified cry of an anonymous internet poster with a dash of

ironic and indignant do-you-know-who-I -am?! thrown in.

[Actor]

60. Forget me, look at what the WORLD is saying

President Barack Obama is trying but failing to reassure foreign leaders convinced that Donald Trump will be the next president of the United States. They're in full-boil panic.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/trump-terrifies-world-leaders-222233#ixzz49DVGNXFM
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

[cali]

61. Deflection.

[rbrnmw]

63. probably not they have no shame. They are implying you are employed by David Brock

and work for his SuperPac Correct the Record. I'm sorry they are doing that to people here.

[Ken Burch]

6. Democrats aren't supposed to attack poor people.

And most people on welfare actually AREN'T deadbeats.

The overwhelming majority of people on public assistance want to work and would work if there were jobs they could get to and if the jobs provided healthcare for their kids(which is another reason we should push for single-payer...it would get a lot of people OFF of welfare).

[Akicita]

33. I know. Let's export thousands of jobs and import millions of foreign workers. That will help poor

Americans find good jobs and get off welfare. Or so we are told by our puppet masters.

[Yurovsky]

64. That was the OLD Democratic Party. In the new, corporate-owned Democratic Party...

you'll notice many changes, mostly geared at keeping the peasants in their place and at arms length from the 1% who've been kind enough to purchase the Party and save it from those dirty, nasty, no-good progressives...

[DonCoquixote]

11. nice ancedote

Got any stats to prove this "deadbeat" quality you are ready to tar people with, or worse, risk starving an innocent person for?

It is so sad to see the people that claim to the liberals, that probably spent the 70's and 80's getting hell from the Archie Bunkers of the world, turn into the sort of people liberals used to fight.

We got ours, Hillary and Bill got theirs, so to everyone else, up yours!

One word of warning to those ready to slam "deadbeats", thanks to this global economy that certain people promoter, thanks to those H1-b Visas that are the closest we have come to legalized slavery since the C.S.A was in bloom, a lot of you who think you will never need welfare are going to find all those years of hard work do not mean squat. Thanks to the fact tha banks have been let loose like a bunch of hounds after a fox, you may find your savings can be smoked to ashes like the cigar in your banker's mouth.

Then again, what has Hillary said about H1b visas?

And double all this if she finally goes after Assad, which is to say, plays chicken with Vlad Putin.

not like she would ever be flippant about war"

or that there would be consequences of that:

Now, let me be clear, since this is Clinton vs Trump, Clinton hands down, and I realize that is all many care about, however, the fact is, these are holes in the Hillary boat she could EASILY patch. Remember how Bernie lost steam after Hillary questioned both the KXL and the TTP? When she acted like a LIBERAL, she won. However, because a lot of America, including a lot of self described "liberals" say they hate "welfare cheats" and love war as much as the GOP, people who wish to pander to them say they will punish those welfare cheats and Middle easterners.

In short, if we lose this, it will be because we allowed liberal values to be copied and co-opted by the self described "centrists" aka, those people who were driven from their party, but tricked many liberals into agreeing with them so they could stay in this "big tent", and in the process, push many of the people liberals used to care about out of the tent.

Hillary, while I have m,any problems with her, is not my enemy, but I am not being her friend by letting the Debbie Wasserman Schultzes pour liquor down her throat and then asking Hillary to drive her home.

[scscholar]

29. Stop believing the corporate media lies

That's so sad you think that...or are you just trying to get an angry response?

[riderinthestorm]

66. That's a pretty disgusting RW lie actually

Myth #2: Welfare Recipients Are Lazy

The idea that most people on welfare are able-bodied adults who are just too lazy to get a job and make an honest living is utterly false.

Most benefit programs require recipients to work in order to collect. Take Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), for example. Single parents receiving this grant must work at least 30 hours per week in order to be eligible, and two-parent families must work between 35 and 50 hours a week.

The fact is, blue-collar wages in America are simply not high enough to support workers in today’s economy. The wages paid by many large employers are so low that their full-time employees are eligible for welfare.

You heard that right: People are working full-time to support their families, paying their fair share of taxes, but are so underpaid that they can’t get by without relying on government assistance.

This is partly due to the disturbing fact that the federal minimum wage has not been increased in over five years (despite the incessantly rising cost of living in our country) and partly due to voracious corporate greed.

And furthermore, half of all food stamp recipients are children. More than 82% of all food stamp money goes to households that include children, elderly people, or people with disabilities.These are people who legally or physically cannot work and live at the mercy of the system.

So where are all of these able-bodied lazy adults who are luxuriating off of their benefits? They are a fabrication.

Most people on welfare are hardworking, taxpaying citizens, just like the rest of us. Or they are impoverished children, elders, or folks with disabilities.

But it’s a lot easier for welfare critics to take help away from people that they imagine are lazy and deceitful, so that false image lives on.

http://groundswell.org/7-lies-about-welfare-that-many-people-believe-are-fact/

[YouDig]

3. Is there any reason you didn't boldface "Poverty overall is down" and "child poverty has dropped"?

Just curious. Do you not think poverty is an important issue? You highlighted the part about welfare rolls, but not poverty.

[Cheese Sandwich]

7. Because welfare reform was an attack on working class people and I wanted to bold that out.

[YouDig]

9. Aha, the actual fact that poverty and child poverty dropped while employment went up is

not something you think is important in this discussion.

Well that explains why so many Bernie supporters don't seem to have a problem handing the country to Trump. If poverty rates go back up, just boldface something else.

[Cheese Sandwich]

10. poverty goes up and down. Welfare reform was a structural change, permanent.

It was easy to kill welfare when poverty was down, and less people needed it. But when the tides turned and the jobs disappeared, then we were left without a safety net.

That's Clinton welfare reform.

[YouDig]

13. Not during the Clinton administration. Then it just went down.

Including after 1996. But I guess when facts don't help the narrative, you just try to boldface something else.

[Cheese Sandwich]

14. Well when Clinton was cutting welfare didn't he care that if the economy collapsed then people

wouldn't have a safety net?

[YouDig]

21. His policies greatly reduced poverty. He couldn't forsee that Bush would wreck the economy after

him. I'm not actually a fan of welfare reform, though like a lot of things Clinton it wasn't as bad as some people make it out to be. After all, poverty did go down afterwards contrary to what some people predicted.

But it's pretty disingenuous to talk about Hillary using the word "deadbeats" while ignoring the fact that the Clinton administration reduced poverty and increased jobs, by a lot.

[Cheese Sandwich]

23. "couldn't forsee"? - The economy always goes up and down in cycles every few years. That's basic.

Who couldn't forsee that? And he's going to be back in charge of the economy again? We're screwed. Head for the hills.

[YouDig]

27. You think that poverty went down for an entire decade in the 90s, and then

crept up again for an entire decade of W-nomics was just a cyclical thing?

[Cheese Sandwich]

34. The cycles always happen. That is extremely predictable.

To call it simply "cyclical" would be to oversimplify.

It was partly cyclical, partly structural owing to changes like automation, jobs moving to other countries, and financial deregulation.

Some resulting from policies Bill signed on his way out of office, like permanent trade relations with China.

[YouDig]

36. No, 10-years of decreasing and then 10 years increasing poverty is not predictable.

It's not a "cycle." As far as free trade, again, after PNTR and NAFTA were passed, employment, wages went up and poverty went down.

[Cheese Sandwich]

40. PNTR was not passed until very late in the Clinton years. To be real it had a huge effect.

If you don't believe me walk around Walmart and look at the tags.

Anybody who thinks free trade with China made US wages go up, I can see why they would vote for Hillary Clinton.

[YouDig]

43. That is true, but NAFTA wasn't.

I don't think either made US wages go up, but I'm also skeptical that they had the huge negative effects that Bernie is talking about. Definitely some plants were closed, but then it also reduced consumer prices, which is a benefit, though harder to localize than when a plant closes down and everyone gets laid off.

I think that the automation/information economy thing is much bigger in terms of wage gap increases. Even if factories stay here they don't employ as many people because they are more efficient. Also tax policy has contributed to inequality.

[0rganism]

55. this is an extremely important point

let's for the moment attribute the dismal economy of the early 2000's entirely to W's unleadership and stupidity. everything was fine under president Clinton, and then W came along and fucked it all up. that's a pretty standard narrative, one cited in this very sub-thread. forget any arguments or observations about cycles or delayed feedback or anything like that, the whole thing boils down to a change of leadership from decent to crappy.

point is, we get welfare reform in all cases, good economy or dismal, decent leadership or crappy leadership.

every couple years, people in this country make a decision about leadership. sometimes we choose well, sometimes we don't.

what welfare as it was gave us was some degree of assurance that people would be protected from the vicissitudes of economic fate, whether caused by cyclic downturns or democracy fucking up.

WJC ended that assurance. for all the good he did (and he did some good things) he really shit the bed on this one, like he thought we'd never see hard times ever again. oops.

we could build that safety net back into our social fabric, but it will be difficult politically, and difficult to maintain once we have it. doesn't mean we shouldn't try, but it's not going to be ez-pz. we the people have a tendency not to appreciate what we have, and accept losses of basic protections as some kind of new normal -- like a sports team losing a star player to injury or something, it just happens sometimes, and you can't stop playing the game because of it, right?

except this isn't a game, and the people of america aren't a sports team. i do hope we the people recognize this someday.

[reformist2]

16. Over the long run, the Clintons' welfare reform has NOT reduced poverty.

[YouDig]

24. While he was in office, it greatly decreased, this is a statistical fact.

It's hard to attribute specific outcomes as caused by specific policies, but overall it's hard to argue with the 90s economic record. If the 2000s were like the 90s (i.e. if Nader didn't throw the election to Bush) then we'd be in a whole different place.

[reformist2]

32. It did, mostly because of the internet boom. Very unusual scenario.

[MariaThinks]

30. because bernie supporters don't care about helping the poor evidently, only nitpicking words.

the fact that poverty went down would be the progressive and liberal goal. Attacking the words is what republicans have been doing and look what's happened to their disgusting party.

If we needed any more proof that Hillary is being unfairly attacked and harassed - this is it. A success is taken to attack her because she said something perhaps uneloquently. Which means sees speaking WITHOUT talking points.


the bern is done.

[maxsolomon]

4. I'm not going to get to worked up about this

Who is the 'we' she's quoting?

"Now that we've said 'these people are no longer deadbeats, they're actually out there being productive', how do we keep them there? She and Bill? The Congress? The royal we?

Punctuation is everything.

And there actually are some deadbeats. Not a majority by any strectch, but they exist.

[jwirr]

28. Oh, yes there are deadbeats! Me and a black mother in NC

were made into "deadbeats" by Hillary and Bill. We did not have REAL jobs. We both took care of our severely disabled children 24/7 instead of placing them into much more expensive institutions. We lived on welfare so that we could be home to do this unreal job.

The difference for I and the black mother was that I lived in MN and they acted immediately when they realized that I and others like me would be forced to "get a REAL job". MN made deadbeats like me an exception to Hillary's and Bill's welfare reform. I got to stay home and take care of my child for 45 years but never was it ever considered a REAL job.

The mother in NC got to be famous. She was on the Dan Rather News show crying while her child was taken out of her home by an ambulance crew to live out the rest of his/her life in one of those expensive institutions. And I am assuming that the mother may have gotten a REAL job. Maybe taking care of someone else's child. And Hillary was satisfied - the NC mother was no longer a deadbeat. Supposedly Hillary had succeeded helping at least one woman and child. As the other mother in this story I doubt it.

I will never forgive Hillary Clinton for what she did to that mother and child in NC.

And my story is only one way that the welfare reform hurt a lot of people. Both women and children.

Yes, I was one of Hillary's deadbeats - and I am damned proud of it.

[maxsolomon]

54. I didn't say that you were a deadbeat, nor the mother in NC. I doubt Clinton would either.

Maybe you should contact her and ask - or is it just easier to never forgive?

Curious:

1. Are you contending that there is/was NO welfare fraud? that everyone on the rolls was a saint like you?

2. do you think Hillary Clinton was a legislator when she did this to the mother in NC? If not, how did she do this as 1st Lady? By making speeches that supported her husband's compromise with the loathsome GOP? That makes her directly responsible for an unintended consequence (that was fixed in MN but not NC) how?

I'm realizing that Obama's shiny new car smell was what made him so attractive to some Democrats. No 30 year record of mistakes and compromises to live down.

[jwirr]

58. If she did not say it why was she kicking us off welfare? It

was her and Bill who got the bill passed with absolutely no exceptions.

[Waiting For Everyman]

12. Because it's so much better to sell out your country for millions.

Speaking fees, pay to play deals, and whatnot. She has one whole lot of nerve.

[apnu]

15. I fail to see the issue here

Seems like Hillary is touting a productive system that is getting people out of the welfare system and asking to keep them personally financially secure under their own power.

How is this a bad thing?

The welfare rolls have been cut in half. Child poverty has dropped.

Poverty overall is down. Work, overall, is up.

"Now that we've said these people are no longer deadbeats -- they're actually out there being productive -- how do we keep them there?" Clinton said.

[Cheese Sandwich]

19. It's because she called us deadbeats

[apnu]

25. Well context matters

Show us were she said something like "you all are deadbeats" or "people on welfare are deadbeats". The quote in the OP clearly has context around it, and people are focusing on the word "deadbeat" and not the context.

This thread boils down to childish "oooh! she said a dirty word!" nonsense.

[Cheese Sandwich]

37. Whatever. If you want to dance around it and try to justify it, go ahead.

Nobody is convincing anyone of anything here.

[jwirr]

39. The welfare rolls were cut in half. Oh, yes, but in the welfare

office in our country and across the country social workers and income maintenance workers were busy helping their clients onto Social Security Disability if they could and finding ways to exempt them like they did me and my daughter.

Also the stats can be made to lie as we all know. And I think you are forgetting all the people who were helped into new poverty when the bubble burst in 2008. Bill and Hillary had a hand in that.

Had they wanted to help everyone they would have had exceptions to their law - like me and the black woman in NC and people in areas that did not have jobs available. There was no exceptions for reality in their dreams and I doubt that there is now.

[apnu]

45. Ok, i hear you.

But did she call you a deadbeat? Because the quote above shows she's talking about something other than 'welfare people are deadbeats'

I believe your story.

[jwirr]

47. My point is that she did not in anyway accept that there

were people who her program would hurt. Had I not had a state that was willing to stand against them my daughter today would have been dead.

Most of us took her statement about deadbeats as meaning that we were all deadbeats if for some reason we could not get off welfare.

There have been posts here about how Bill used dog whistles to tell the whites in the south that he was going to do something about crime - one was a picture of him and southern governors standing in front of a group of black prisons with their backs turned to them and talking about this issue. That was a horrible dog whistle and this deadbeat wording was very much the same thing.

It stereotypes people to the point that it influences all around them. And there is little one can do to fight back. I had two things going for me - my state and white privilege. The lady in NC did not have any of that. And there were a lot of us.

[apnu]

49. The wording was poor yes

We can call it a gaff and it was offensive. But she didn't mean it in an offensive manner. That and the failures of welfare, that the Clintons have a hand in, make it bad. No doubt.

I'm sensitive to derogatory terms on welfare also. I remember as a small boy in the early 80s the President of the United States talking about "welfare queens" while I and my mother were on welfare. To me the President called my mother a "welfare queen" and sneered. I forever loathe Reagan for it.

[Fumesucker]

50. She called us "deadbeats" but meant it only in the good way

[riderinthestorm]

68. You hate Reagan for "welfare queens" but jwirr can't similarly loathe Clinton for deadbeats?

[NurseJackie]

17. Meh. This again? Nobody cared then. Nobody cares now ...

... well ... nobody except the Hillary-haters who're recycling old smears out of desperation.

Y'all have fun. It won't change a thing.

[Cheese Sandwich]

22. People do care about it I think.

[NurseJackie]

26. Enjoy!

[Octafish]

56. Your rudeness doesn't cover for you.

Detroit has thousands of homeless children going to decrepit public schools.

How is it their fault they are poor? How is it their parents' fault there are near zero jobs?

I wouldn't wish their sadness, even on you.

[oasis]

18. Not to worry. I doubt if Hillary will continue to insult deadbeats. nt

[ThePhilosopher04]

20. Spoken like the solid conservative she is

[stillwaiting]

42. HRC's point of view is right wing Republican here.

It is blatant conservatism.

Such a shame. Such a damn shame.

[MisterP]

46. "she can do that! she's for all those deadbeats!"

[newrevolution]

48. I had to seek public assistance for almost a year after I lost my job

Hillary I am not a deadbeat

[Fumesucker]

51. Welcome to DU

And rest assured that Hillary only meant "deadbeat" in the best possible way.

[My Good Babushka]

52. Working yourself into an early grave

is the only way to earn even the thinnest slice of human dignity and basic human rights if you're a poor, apparently.
Forget that there is just not enough work in our automated, technologically advanced economy for 40-hours a week to even make any sense. If the poors are not terribly uncomfortable at every moment, why would anyone even get up in the morning?

[Cheese Sandwich]

62. yes you have it figured out

[whatthehey]

53. Ironically, the glorious leftist pre-DLC party to which many wish to return

Enshrined in it's 1976 platform this very concept with the insistence that every single able-bodied welfare recipient should be forced to work in return for aid, a position which is denouncved as slavery here and much further right than any current Dem proposal.

But the party has been hijacked by Republicans...

[AZ Progressive]

57. "Deadbeats" is how the rich would prefer to see the poor as so...

they can feel good about not caring about helping them (since their conscience won't bother them if they have one.)

[CorkySt.Clair]

65. Unfortunately some are deadbeats.

I'm not a fan of broad brushes. Lots of good people who need help for a little while, or longer who should get it. Those that don't need it, but take it anyway, are, in fact, deadbeats.

[Vinca]

67. That sounds like it came out of the mouth of one of the more hateful Republicans.

But, alas, Hillary said it so it's all good.

[vintx]

69. Why is she so willing to bring in foreign workers on H1B visas,

putting people here out of work?

Hypocrite

[Karmadillo]

70. Ugh.