Hillary Clinton Called People on Welfare "Deadbeats"

[Cheese Sandwich]

(Edited just for clarity)

Hillary Clinton Used To Talk About How The People [Working] Were “No Longer Deadbeats”
As first lady and senator, Clinton talked repeatedly about the transition from welfare to work as a “transition from dependency to dignity.”

Bill Clinton’s overhaul of the welfare system, which was passed in conjunction with a Republican-controlled Congress, replaced a major federal welfare program with block grants to states, required adults to find a job within two years of receiving aid, placed a five-year limit on aid, blocked future legal immigrants from welfare assistance, and cut $24 billion in food stamps. It was denounced by many Democrats, including Peter Edelman, who resigned from his post at the Department of Health and Human Services, arguing that the law would do “serious injury to American children.”
...

Clinton began a column in June 1998 with an anecdote about a mother on welfare whose daughter once came home and said, “Mommy, I’m tired of seeing you sitting around the house doing nothing.”

“One day, Rhonda Costa’s daughter came home from school and announced, ‘Mommy, I’m tired of seeing you sitting around the house doing nothing.’ That’s the day Rhonda decided to get off welfare. Today, Rhonda is an administrative assistant at Salomon Smith Barney, a New York financial services firm. After a year and a half on the job, she earns $29,000 a year with full benefits and stock options.
...

In another column, this time in March 2000, Clinton described the transition from welfare to work a “transition from dependency to dignity.”
...

In a 2002 interview

Clinton also said that people who had moved from welfare to work were “no longer deadbeats.”

“Now that we’ve said these people are no longer deadbeats—they’re actually out there being productive—how do we keep them there?”

read more: http://www.buzzfeed.com/christophermassie/hillary-clinton-used-to-talk-about-how-the-people-on-welfare#.nxl5Yxq13

[HFRN]

1. certainly implies they had been deadbeats

coming from someone who promotes job loss through trade deals and loss from insourcing (H-1b visas) and outsourcing, that's pretty arrogant to call those on welfare 'deadbeats'

[Hulk]

31. Maybe there were some "deadbeats"....

That is what motivated the changes, the perception (by the repuKKKes) that ALL of the people on welfare were deadbeats. The reality was there were "some" who possibly were...and those were weeded out, along with many who were NOT, but were punished as well.

I'm not buying into the idea that their quotes implied that everyone on welfare is or was a deadbeat. If you talked to a repuKKKe...yes, they ALL are deadbeats. But the reality is many on welfare were there because they needed a helping hand to get up and get back into being a productive part of our society. But I think we may have to admit that there were "some" who were milking the system. Not all, and certainly not most...but "some".

I'm not prepared to dump HRC into the tank because of a statement like that. I think if you polled the readers on DU, you'd probably find that most agree with the fact that there were "deadbeats" that were on welfare; and those changes shook them up. And again, it also punished a lot of folks that were on welfare that were NOT deadbeats as well.

Nuff said. Not looking for a fight; but just want to admit what I see as reality to the situation at the time.

[JDPriestly]

44. Meanwhile Bernie respects people.

You say "that most agree with the fact that there were 'deadbeats' that were on welfare."

Please define the word "deadbeat" for me.

Do you consider people who look for work and don't find any that pay well enough to cover the costs associated with working to be "deadbeats"?

Do you consider people who look for work and can't find work because no work is available "deadbeats"?

Do you consider a poor woman who has a disabled child and stays home to care for her disabled child while receiving welfare to be a "deadbeat"?

How about the mother of four whose income of $29,000 does not cover rent, care for her children -- a babysitter at night because she can only get a job at night -- transportation, utilities and food to be a "deadbeat"?

Do you consider a mother of two who stays at home with her children living on her husband's income of $90,000 per year to be a "deadbeat"?

Do you consider a young man aged 30 whose grandfather left him a trust fund of $300,000 a year a "deadbeat"?

Why do you consider this one to be a deadbeat and another not to be a deadbeat?

[Hulk]

47. Pretty much no to all your questions.

You seem to be exactly the sort of DU reader that waits to pounce when someone posts a comment that leaves you with a question. What is a deadbeat? You define it. You want to tell me that there were no persons receiving welfare benefits that didn't fully deserve those benefits for what they were intended for.

Honestly, do you have nothing better to do with your time? I find your post both demeaning and inflammatory. You looking for a fight? Save your time and energy and devote it somewhere where it might actually serve a purpose.

[JDPriestly]

51. I just want to know what "deadbeat" means?

Can a rich person be a "deadbeat"?

To be honest, I thought a deadbeat was a person who didn't pay a bill.

How does it apply to people who used to be on welfare?

It is always amazing to me that wives of the rich have the choice to stay home full time with their young children. But if a poor woman wants to do that, she is looked upon as lazy. Believe me, spending all day with pre-schoolers at home keeps you very busy. It is hard work.

So how do you define a deadbeat?

I'm not sure. My question is sincere. If one uses the term, seems to me one should be able to explain what one means by it.

Nothing personal.

And I type very fast. That's why I have a lot of posts and many of them are rather long. I mean I type really, really fast.

Guess why I type fast? Because I worked as a writer and typed and typed and typed and typed for other people much of my working life.

My back is a bit bent over thanks to the kind of work I did. Now that I am retired, I am trying to exercise to straighten it out.

[haikugal]

78. I have a similar stoop for the same reason..

Last edited Tue Nov 3, 2015, 01:01 PM - Edit history (1)

Years of typing for other people.

Very good post about an important question.

I just posted the most recent talk by Richard Wolff who goes into some depth about this.

Sometimes we all need educating or a refresher...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017281149

Edited to provide a working link...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017280973

[HooptieWagon]

79. Ask Hillary.

She's the one who used the term.

[Hulk]

112. Thanks...

I'm personally offended by these types of responses to MY posts. "What is a deadbeat"? Well, you tell me. What is a jerk? What is a slouch? What is a slacker? WTF difference does it even make. It implies lots of different things to different people.

Yes, a deadbeat is probably somebody who doesn't pay their bills? Perhaps. It is somebody who doesn't pay child support or help with their child's welfare. It's somebody who sits on their butt and doesn't lift a finger to earn a living; and a zillion other things. Yes, you can probably be rich and be a deadbeat. Trump can be a deadbeat. It's all in how you define it, and it's a waste of my time to try to explain such a vague term to someone who honestly doesn't give a rat's behind what I think a deadbeat is.

I just won't bother responding to such replies in the future. Fruitless, and a total waste of my time. Figure it out yourself. What do YOU think a deadbeat is? Then, that's good enough for YOU!

[Aerows]

116. Sneer at the people you expect to get votes from automatically.

Go right ahead.

That will work.

This is 2008 all over again - we will find somebody else to vote for. And we did in droves.

[notadmblnd]

104. I don't know how old you are Hulk but I want to tell you

That if you are speaking about the "aid to dependent children" program that if IRC was begun in the 60's- You are dead wrong about welfare queens and deadbeats. Well, you're only half wrong about the deadbeats, but those would have been the fathers who were allowed to abandon their children and left it for the state to provide for them. In fact, I would even venture to say no single woman with children would have ever had to have resort to welfare if only the states would have gone after deadbeat dads and held them responsible for the children they chose to bring into this world.

[Hulk]

113. Rest you mind...

I wasn't speaking of the "aid to dependent children". Jesus, some people on these threads must sit on needles all day and just wait to jump out and take their skewed points to attack others. Nuff said. i don't want to get insulting, but again, I find your reference to inferring what I mean as an insult.

[Merryland]

127. couldn't agree more

are father-abandoned children "deadbeats"? Are the women caring for them deadbeats? Is there anything more offensive than a wealthy woman with access to every possible comfort and convenience in life expressing such a disgusting view? To call her a defender of women and children is absurd.

[SCantiGOP]

85. One of the more misleading posts I've seen here

Congratulations, sandwhich.

[cantbeserious]

2. HRC - Playing The Role The Oligarch Benefactors Demand

[kcjohn1]

3. All about perspective

People like Hillary see people on welfare and think its because people CHOOSE to be on welfare. That is all you need to know about Hillary. That is her world perspective.

Vast majority of people on welfare would prefer to be working and making more, but unfortunately they don't have the opportunity or resources to get jobs. The focus should not be how to punish these people but create the environment where they have the option of a job.

[BlueJazz]

16. Exactly. Many people seem to also be blind to corporate and wealth welfare.

At least the poor NEED the money.

[oasis]

4. Weak title context wise.

[Cheese Sandwich]

7. "these people are no longer deadbeats—they’re actually...being productive—how do we keep there"

She's calling them deadbeats for being on welfare.

[oasis]

20. If anything "former deadbeats". Getting off welfare used to be a good thing.

[Luminous Animal]

24. People on welfare are not deadbeats. They are people in need. And a compassionate nation helps

them… lifts them up… and compassionate people do not call them deadbeats. Compassionate people do not use demoralizing language when talking about people in need. And the "welfare reform" that she so proudly touted to get rid of the deadbeats has now resulted in the largest poverty and hunger rate for in the so called western world.

But, at least those poor and hungry children aren't deadbeats anymore, eh? They're just apt to become trapped into lifelong poverty due to poor nutrition and medical care but rest assured we won't let them be a deadbeats when they end up in prison for petty crimes. We'll put the to work for pennies on the dollar manning call centers for Bill Gates.

[oasis]

29. I agree on much of what you say. I take issue with the thread title

which is misleading.

Words like "deadbeat" and "freeloader" won't be uttered by Hill in the future. She's savvy enough now to know it's not useful terminology these days.

[Luminous Animal]

36. It was not useful terminology then unless you were trying to make political points by division.

Yeah. She doesn't need to say those words any more because we've relegated those deadbeats and freeloaders to abject poverty so they can't freeload anymore.

[oasis]

40. The Republican Revolution in the 1994

midterms had a lot to do with Bill's actions on welfare. Bill was in a corner. If from inaction, he got booted from the WH in '96 where would poor folks be?

[Scuba]

66. Lamest argument ever.

[oasis]

68. If so, we're even.

[Maedhros]

105. That's my problem with Hillary: she panders to everyone.

When the subject was welfare, she pandered to the Tea Party-types with her "deadbeat" language, because that's what was political expedient at the time.

When the subject was foreign military intervention (i.e. Libya), she panderered to the armchair warrior crowd - "We came, we saw, he died" - because that was what was politically expedient at the time.

Now that it's primary season she's pandering to various liberal groups, because that's what is politically expedient now. Once the General Election comes, we'll see her go back to pandering to conservatives for their votes, because that is what will be politically expedient.

[oasis]

107. Weigh what you know about her accomplisments

against any pandering she may have done. Many would agree the end result justified the means.

[Maedhros]

108. I'm not that enamored with her accomplishments, so no.

She cannot be trusted - she just tells us what we want to hear.

[Prism]

48. A thousand times this

A thousand times. I work with these "deadbeats" every single day. If anyone thinks this is their ideal state, well, I don't know what to say to them. Someday, this could be you.

[Merryland]

129. yes, whatever happened to "there but for fortune"

far as I'm concerned Wall Street is a haven for welfare queens getting away with murder.

[Ms. Toad]

52. You can't call people who were once on welfare "former deadbeats"

without calling those still on welfare "deadbeats." It is a logical impossibility

[rhett o rick]

100. Getting off welfare is STILL a good thing. Your insinuation that the OP says otherwise is weak.

Clinton made is crystal clear that those that got off welfare were doing "a good thing" (using your words) and they were no longer being deadbeats (a bad thing).

It is not unexpected for conservatives to berate those on welfare.

[oasis]

102. Glad you know the difference between "insinuation" and "crystal clear".

Perhaps you can give us your take on the OP title of this thread.

[rhett o rick]

117. It's really quite straight forward. I will be glad to go thru it one more time.

Clinton said that when people got jobs THEY WERE NO LONGER DEADBEATS. The only way one can NO LONGER BE A DEADBEAT, one first has to be a DEADBEAT.

[6chars]

54. She has since evolved

[Cheese Sandwich]

55. that's nice to know

[Luminous Animal]

9. Provide the context then. Tell me how she used welfare recipients and deadbeats in a positive manner

[oasis]

19. My bad. Misleading title. That's more to the point. (eom)

[HooptieWagon]

5. It's how she rolls.

[onehandle]

6. Nice rewrite of the title of the article and twisting of the content there.

No matter how much you fake the 'news,' Our Next President:

[Cheese Sandwich]

11. My title's actually more accurate than the one in the article

Since she said this:

"these people are no longer deadbeats—they’re actually out there being productive—how do we keep them there?

She says they are deadbeats then they got productive and became not deadbeats.

I improved a bad title on Buzzfeed to make it more accurate.

[onehandle]

13. Yes. You really added to the journalistic credibility of 'BuzzFeed.'

[img][/img]

[Cheese Sandwich]

14. Lol!

[Luminous Animal]

12. So, she didn't say this?

“Now that we’ve said these people are no longer deadbeats—they’re actually out there being productive—how do we keep them there?”

[geek tragedy]

8. Ewww. nt

[Zorra]

10. She has no chance to win the GE. People don't trust her, and it's no surprise. nt

[Aerows]

114. And here is Exhibit A.

You wonder why I don't trust her?

She suddenly evolved when it was safe. I trust a candidate that never needed to evolve.

[ericson00]

15. even if she actually did,

and I take the "quotes" from the Clintons with a grain of salt, welfare was by far one of the biggest wedge issues that kept Dukakis, Mondale, and McGovern far away from the White House. That being gone is one as a national issue is why Democrats win the most votes 5 in 6 times since 1992.

[Hydra]

27. Lol- so we let people starve so we can win the White House?

What a high bar...next someone will say Hillary Clinton had to support the IWR, which all of us knew was based on a lie...because that would have kept Kerry out of the WH.

Oh, wait.

[oasis]

33. Nothing succeeds like success.

[RufusTFirefly]

17. What are you? A misogynist? A Karl Rove plant? Or simply a hater?

I'm sorry, but you have to choose one of the three. As that great progressive Margaret Thatcher used to say, "TINA." There is no alternative.

[John Poet]

18. Oh, make the pain stop!

Between this and the private prison lobby bundling money for her campaign,
and her praise for Kissinger and being pals with the Bush criminal family,
you're all really hurting me on Hillary today....

Any one of the things is bad enough, but...

[Cheese Sandwich]

21. Don't miss this one...

Criminal Inquiry Sought in Hillary Clinton’s Use of Email
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251471718

[pa28]

22. I wonder if she's evolved?

In "Living History" written around the very same time she made the "deadbeat" comment she used some very different language to describe her support of reform. It was framed as a necessary evil to prevent Republicans from enacting more punitive welfare regime later on.

There were political considerations, of course: “The legislation was far from perfect,’’ she wrote, “which is where pragmatic politics entered in. It was preferable to sign the measure knowing that a Democratic administration was in place to implement it humanely. If he vetoed welfare reform a third time, Bill would be handing the Republicans a potential political windfall.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-05-26/will-hillary-clinton-run-against-her-husband-s-welfare-legacy-

Then, in one of those accidental moment of candor where the high level reasoning is thrown out they are simply "deadbeats". Which Hillary is the real one? She's embarked on a so-called "non-apology apology tour" addressing the damage done by policies she's previously supported. However, so far she has not mentioned welfare reform.

Like her support for the war in Iraq, Clinton has sought to rhetorically distance herself from her past and that of her husband, without actually apologizing for her role in these debacles. Hillary first did her speech at Columbia University, where she said we need to “end the era of mass incarceration,” though she did not mention her earlier support for the 1994 crime bill that dramatically boosted prison populations.


In her speech this week on immigration, she advocated for a more lenient path than that of her husband, but did not explicitly apologize for anti-immigrant positions in the past, such as rejecting drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants.

One item that has not appeared on the non-apology apology tour is welfare reform. It remains to be seen whether the tragic tale of Lillie Harden and others like her who were stripped of what little assistance the government provided will shift Clinton and the rest of the Democratic Party, rhetorically or in substance.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/tragic-end-woman-bill-clinton-exploited-poster-child-gutting-welfare

[WillyT]

23. With A Moistened Finger... In The Wind...

[Cheese Sandwich]

37. "framed as a necessary evil"

That reminds me of how we have to cut social security to save social security.

[MisterP]

83. or Qadima attacking Gaza--to keep the REAL warmongers, Likud, out of office, natch!

[chervilant]

121. I'll grant you that...

Ms. Clinton does have a knack for "pragmatic politics."

[ibegurpard]

25. I'm not really interested in what may have been

An unfortunate slip of the tongue. But this policy fucked a lot of people and continues to do so to this day.

[sabrina 1]

26. Sickening, but I've read her own words regarding her support for the

draconian Welfare Bill when she stated as a very privileged person that the poor when this bill went into effect, would be forced out dependency into being independent.

Speaking about single moms and their children who have been the victims mostly of that legislation in such a way, I found to be, being kind, extremely condescending.

[Hydra]

30. That's because it is

It's kind of amazing- sometimes I feel like I'm talking to an Alien when I speak with someone who supports this sort of thing. They seem to have no interest in or empathy for normal people, only in cold "ideals" that tell them that a person's worth is only in how productive a slave they are...because let's face it, they don't want the people at the bottom rising up to anything beyond median income.

I wonder what it's like to know you are destroying people's lives...for something as banal as money and political power.

[2banon]

35. well put.

They seem to have no interest in or empathy for normal people, only in cold "ideals" that tell them that a person's worth is only in how productive a slave they are...

and oh, I too feel like I'm talking to an alien. which is weird when you consider that person is in the same tribe.

[sabrina 1]

81. What the bill did was to force poor mothers into cheap labor jobs

at McDonalds, sometimes having to spend one to two hours getting to those jobs, leaving their children to fend for themselves. I remember such a case where the child of a poor mother who had to take a bus to her slavelabor wage job which took her two hours, brought a gun to school. She had to leave him to fend for himself because she had to get to that job in order to have some money to feed her family, the safety net gone due to this awful bill.

Sanders plan which he calls 'Family Values' actually provides for poor mothers to take care of their children. It doesn't focus on pushing them out the door to low wage, non productive jobs, leaving their children with no supervision or decent care.

That bill has contributed to even deeper poverty for single moms and their children and it absolutely needs to be rescinded. One of the biggest failures, but then it is a Republican bill so should we be surprised, of the poor and how anyone could not have seen that from the beginning, (they did, most of the Clinton's close associates in the WH at the time, Pete Edelman eg did see it, he resigned in protest when Clinton signed it) is beyond me.

It did provide cheap labor for Corps though.

[Hydra]

106. That's all it's really about

Even in her example, the mother is working for below median income at one of companies contributing to our poor economy. None of the people looking to strip welfare want the people it hurts to move up the ladder more than a step or two...after all, they are unworthy in the eyes of the privileged.

[KoKo]

80. ...!

[Thinkingabout]

28. Was this post intended on bashing or smearing Hillary Clinton? I have seen posts saying this is not

happening, maybe I misread this one. Bookmarking for future reference.

[Hydra]

32. Posting a position taken, I would say

Which would make sense as to why her election strategy seems to be to downplay the economics of it all. Cuz really, like Jeb said, there isn't a problem- people just need to work more and longer hours. That will fix everything.

[Thinkingabout]

62. She has been talking about economics. In fact she had something tosay about Jeb's comment.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/hillary-clinton-2016-jeb-bush-longer-hours-120021.html

Information is too easily obtained through search engines and many news reports every day, and yes Hillary is talking about more than economics, it isn't a downplay, as president one must be concerned about lots of issues.

[Hydra]

71. Sure, but she's committing to as little as possible

Like her refusal to back the $15 per hour minimum wage movement. Her need for "evolves" on so many positions is discouraging. She used to be one of my heroes when I was a low information voter. I'd love to hear her take firm stances on things that the nation needs, but she's courting big money. They're even said they don't care what her required rhetoric is to win, then know the money buys them her support.

That's kind of sad, don't you think? Is that REALLY the best our party has to offer?

[Thinkingabout]

75. I know her plan to get profit sharing back to the employees does not put money into the pockets of

employees. Don't forget she sponsored the last bill passed for increase in minimum wages and even sponsored on to tie increases in minimum wages to raises of Congress which did not pass but she tried. Also, why just back $15 an hour, why not go for more. $15 a hour is not enough to take care of a family. You are setting your goals pretty low.

[Hydra]

77. Tell Ms. Clinton that

I'd rather it be higher, but she danced around the issue, saying some people should get less than $15. And regarding profit sharing, it's a cute idea, but I've been in companies where the owners funnelled the money in various places to show the company as breaking even, while we were raking in more business than ever. "Sorry, there was no profit this year, but maybe next if we work harder..."

Maybe she'll "evolve" again during the primary. Or maybe she'll just do what President Obama did- tell us what we wanted to hear and then ignore it later after the election.

[Thinkingabout]

82. Perhaps tell the $15 minimum wage promoters the minimum wage in Seattle is $15, aim higher.

I worked for a company which had profit sharing and I always appreciated the profit sharing check every year.

On the evolving issue, I admit I have been evolving for years, proud of the fact I have evolved, will continue to evolve. I feel sorry for those who are unable to evolve, and even evolving on others evolving.

[zeemike]

34. I sure would like to sneak into GOP headquarters and have a look in their dirt box.

I bet it is crammed full of DVDs with stuff like this just waiting till she gets the nomination to drop on her.
Jeb is roofing for her...it's his best chance.

[Hydra]

38. The GOP absolutely would like her in the general election

I doubt Jeb could win- I had bets here that he would be the candidate and the winner of 2016 by hook or by crook...but if Former Sec. Clinton were in, all the RW policies would be put in place while they would be free to revile Clinton as a "Commie Leftie Socialist!" for it.

Double win for them.

[zeemike]

42. The beauty of it is they can make it work either way.

It all depends on whether they want to re rehabilitate the Bush Brand...and if they are hot to privatize SS because with a Bush there he would have a mandate...and they would tell us that.
And I think Jeb can win...and they know how to play the hook or by crook part...the GOP base will all turn out, but many independents and some Dems will stay home once they have been pounded with the Clinton dirt for a few months.

[Thinkingabout]

63. Hillary is the candidate the GOP does not want in the general, listen to Bill Krystal, he wants some

one else.

[Scuba]

67. Bill Krystal... Bwahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

[Hydra]

72. LOL

Did you get to see this yet?



It's the Bush/Clinton Dynasty. They absolutely want a DLC candidate in the general- no chance of failure if both candidates are on the same team.

[Thinkingabout]

73. Has Bernie been on the cover of any magazines?

[Hydra]

74. You're not bothered by the excessive coziness with the Bush Family by the DLC?

I'd personally like someone a lot Left of Bernie, but do we REALLY need the someone with Former Secretary Clinton's record in the WH again? I thought we'd all be bored with Bush policies after 35 years of them.

[Thinkingabout]

76. Not bothered with the TLC for sure, since it is a think tank which plans contrary to popular belief.

BTW, they are for increases of wages, perhaps you could do some research to see plans helping the working people before making negative remarks. Do you know the first big event which GWB and WJC worked? I'll help you, they worked on raising money for the people of Haiti after a national disaster. Do you think it is possible to work across the aisles in accomplishing needed policy or do it the TP way and if any relationship with others then sends both people in the hate column.

[Merryland]

130. all you need to know about the Clintons.

[sunnystarr]

119. who are you people??

I can't believe I'm at DU. First it's overtaken by Bernie supporters ... and I like Bernie well enough, always have. But he's not a Democrat. How does that happen anyway? You'd think you would have to be a member of the party to run under its banner and support.

So now Hydra you're here already spreading the new meme hatched a few days ago. Since Bernie is a Socialist, anything Hillary agrees with him on is socialist and therefore she is a Socialist ... you added the Commie to it. They will look to paint her with that like they swiftboated John Kerry.

Hillary is a centrist but she always supported all the bread and butter democratic policies. Obama is a centrist and I'm in awe of all he's accomplished. Everyone has their own little pet policy they want and if they don't get it they'll take their marbles and stay home.

The goal is simple. A Democrat MUST win the election. Stop the sniping and gnawing and clawing at every little comment they made 20 years ago or at what was presented or passed or is an idea in the making doesn't have every little thing you want it to have.

The Supreme Court is at stake which will affect all of us for much longer than the next POTUS. War or Peace is at stake ... the lives of our children and other innocents.

As far as welfare and deadbeats back in the 90's ... there was enormous pressure generated by the R's who sold it successfully to the American people. The truth is that reforms really did have to be made and while I'm not an expert, I lived through those times and saw that finally welfare moms had the opportunity to go back to school, to get free or reduced childcare, and participate in many programs designed to help them get into the workforce. Up to then, there was no incentive since if you worked at all your benefits were gone and you'd lose health care. Was it perfect? Nope. It should have been revised when the flaws became evident. I don't know if any of it was since I didn't follow it further. The deadbeats referred to the dads who skipped out on child support payments. That was fixed too.

When I read the comments laced with poison to create skepticism about Hillary the foul odor smells like the Republican dirty underhanded political agenda. I feel like we're infiltrated. That may not be true but it sure feels like it to me.

[Hydra]

120. There is so much wrong with this post that I don't even know where to start

But I guess I'll go line by line.

Bernie supporters. I guess it's kinda sad that the Independent is more of a Democrat than our "Leading Candidate."

Hillary as a commie socialist. You were paying attention when President Obama sold us RomneyCare/Gingrich/Nixon Plan as the ACA, weren't you? When he bailed the banks out? The RW calls propping up Capitalism "Red commie socialism." Sad thing is that nobody calls them on it. Note my quotes on that in this post and previous- I'm referring to their position, not mine.

Centerists are awesome. I'm not terribly fond of "centerists&quot read, Far Right in our party). They all seem to think Republicans are awesome and why shouldn't we all be like that, especially Bushco. I guess it pays well or something...but our party is not supposed to be about the money, it's supposed to be about the people.

Lesser of 2 Evils. Of course someone with a D after their name will win this election. It will probably be Former Sec. Clinton, but we do have better people available with better voting records and less 1% oriented viewpoints.

SCOTUS. This is a valid point finally, but addressed above.

Social safety net had to be cut This is just...I don't know how to wrap my mind around this. We're supposed to do the wrong thing and hurt people...because the RW is just so scary??? And people benefited from it? Try living at that level, especially now, and then get back to me. Almost every program to help people at that level is GONE. Children are starving in one if the richest countries in the world because the RW thinks lazy single mothers are a thing.

Creating skepticism about Hillary Clinton That boat sailed for all of us decades ago. She supported things like welfare gutting and the Iraq War, Kissinger is a good friend of hers, She and her husband are cozy with Bushco and Goldman Sachs...There's no skepticism required- she practically screams what team she's on, and it's not a good one for our party.

[jtuck004]

39. What did you call the thieving employers and bank$ter/donors that fucked them over and

left these, our neighbors, in poverty, from which the vast majority will never recover? The same poverty their children and their children's children will live in?

Bet it was nicer than deadbeat.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

41. When you make $200,000.00 to speak for 45 minutes you figure poverty is a choice.

[oasis]

43. March of 2000? Are you sure she was getting that much then?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

45. Do you think things have improved since then?

Especially since she's gotten a lot of those speaking fees from banksters?

[oasis]

69. I'm guessing you're not going to answer the question put to you.

Just throwing stuff out there to pile on.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

92. Why wouldn't they? A former FLOTUS, published author,....

....and former board member of Walmart.

[Thinkingabout]

64. Would you turn down $200,000 to speak to a group? Hell no, look at how much a football player gets

for playing a game.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

91. Hillary isn't on the ballot to play football.

[Thinkingabout]

95. Wow, you missed on this one for sure.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

96. You're the one that tried to equate the Presidency to a game.

[Thinkingabout]

97. Oh, I did not post the following:

"When you make $200,000.00 to speak for 45 minutes you figure poverty is a choice."

I only compared making $200,000 a football player makes playing football to giving a speech for $200,000. There is more than one way to make $200,000 but the only one I see here is complaining because Hillary is able to get $200,000 for a speech.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

98. So,...you're comparing celebrities?

[Indepatriot]

46. Please quit "bashing" HRC by quoting her and discussing her history.

[pa28]

49. When discussion of her public service record and "bashing" become the same thing . . .

You've got a deeply flawed candidate.

[MisterP]

50. they might as well be waving the St Andrew's Cross!

do not intrude on our sacred ground! just be grateful that we drip gobbets of wisdom to you from our subforums!

[sabrina 1]

53. Sad, so disappointed in this woman, I used to support her, thought

she would be FOR the poor, the most vulnerable. But I was wrong.

[whatchamacallit]

56. But she "connects"

We are so fucked.

[BainsBane]

57. Look at the quotes from this article

and tell me how that fits with the version in the buzzfeed piece.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251471986

[Cheese Sandwich]

58. Edit: let's see

This "Mommy" thing is there...

One day, Rhonda Costa's daughter came home from school and announced, "Mommy, I'm tired of seeing you sitting around the house doing nothing." That's the day Rhonda decided to get off welfare.

Today, Rhonda is an administrative assistant at Salomon Smith Barney, a New York financial services firm. After a year and a half on the job, she earns $29,000 a year with full benefits and stock options.

http://www.creators.com/opinion/hillary-clinton/talking-it-over-1998-06-03.html


OK this is there...

Since we first asked mothers to move from welfare to work, millions of families have made the transition from dependency to dignity. While many single mothers are doing a tremendous job of working and raising their children, they should not have to do it alone. It is up to Congress to pass these proposals, so that more fathers can share the responsibility of supporting their families, and so that every child has a chance to find the love and support of two parents.

http://www.creators.com/opinion/hillary-clinton/talking-it-over-2000-03-15.html


Here is a link to the interview cited as Gettysburg Times, but which is reprinted here in another paper, and contains the quote:

“Now that we’ve said these people are no longer deadbeats—they’re actually out there being productive—how do we keep them there?”

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=TnshAAAAIBAJ&sjid=IYoFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1438%2C3320670

[BainsBane]

59. The other OP links directly to the article cited in Buzzfeed

where the deadbeat reference occurred. It certainly looks like Buzzfeed took it completely out of context. They have a discussion of welfare reform and people getting jobs. As someone who grew up on welfare, I see nothing wrong with anything said there because I can tell you nobody likes living on welfare. People do it because they don't have a choice and would much prefer a job. I'm not saying the reform worked well, but rather I don't see anything problematic about Clinton's statements.

Okay, on to deadbeats. There is a gap in the article and then it uses that comment. The OP from the other poster indicates she was talking about deadbeat dads who don't pay child support. I would really like to know what the truth is here, and since you posted the story I think you would have an interest in that too.

[Cheese Sandwich]

60. ok hang on I'm checking too, about gettysburg something

[Cheese Sandwich]

61. I believe everything is in order. All the quotes check out as real. Here are the links.

This "Mommy" thing is there...

One day, Rhonda Costa's daughter came home from school and announced, "Mommy, I'm tired of seeing you sitting around the house doing nothing." That's the day Rhonda decided to get off welfare.

Today, Rhonda is an administrative assistant at Salomon Smith Barney, a New York financial services firm. After a year and a half on the job, she earns $29,000 a year with full benefits and stock options.

http://www.creators.com/opinion/hillary-clinton/talking-it-over-1998-06-03.html


OK this is there...

Since we first asked mothers to move from welfare to work, millions of families have made the transition from dependency to dignity. While many single mothers are doing a tremendous job of working and raising their children, they should not have to do it alone. It is up to Congress to pass these proposals, so that more fathers can share the responsibility of supporting their families, and so that every child has a chance to find the love and support of two parents.

http://www.creators.com/opinion/hillary-clinton/talking-it-over-2000-03-15.html


Here is a link to the interview cited as Gettysburg Times, but which is reprinted here in another paper, and contains the quote:

“Now that we’ve said these people are no longer deadbeats—they’re actually out there being productive—how do we keep them there?”

https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=TnshAAAAIBAJ&sjid=IYoFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1438%2C3320670

[Luminous Animal]

86. I'm glad you were able to post a link to the article.

[Cheese Sandwich]

99. Yes. Some are wrongly claiming she was only referring to "deadbeat dads"...

But the cited article is not about dads or child support enforcement. It is about getting supposed deadbeats off the dole and back to being productive:

Behind paywall here...
http://www.newspapers.com/newspage/19796257/

Republished in several newspapers and can be found in various online archives like this...
https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=TnshAAAAIBAJ&sjid=IYoFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1438%2C3320670


And here, edited for length here by me. Is not about "deadbeat dads".

Clinton finds herself in midst of welfare reform
Link: http://poststar.com/opinion/commentary/clinton-finds-herself-in-midst-of-welfare-reform/article_599bddbb-686e-5d58-88cd-6a3b8d859e7b.html

April 16, 2002 12:00 am • MARIE COCCO(0) Comments
Newsday

WASHINGTON - This is when the Hillary lore meets Hillary the legislator.

Welfare reform is back.

It was one of those arguments six years ago in which Hillary Rodham Clinton could not catch a break. To the right, she was the shadowy operative of a leftist cabal in the White House, bent on keeping her own husband from fulfilling his promise to end welfare as we know it. 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."
...

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.

Congress must now reauthorize the landmark 1996 legislation...

The former welfare mothers are working. But they are still poor. About a third of those who left welfare report that they shrink their meals - or skip them altogether - because they haven't enough food. Even more say they can't pay the rent or the utility bills every month. The U.S. Conference of Mayors, in its annual report on hunger and homelessness, says welfare revision is an engine driving the working poor to the food pantries....


"Now the conversation should be about how do you make work pay? How do you reduce poverty?" the senator said. "Before, it was about this terrible welfare system, and that was a conversation stopper. It just blinded people to what some of the underlying problems were."

The underlying problems are still the underlying problems. Child care for the working poor remains scarce, and scarcely affordable. Transportation to jobs in the suburbs is spotty. State health insurance coverage for poor kids often is unavailable to their mothers, who must, nonetheless, stay healthy to stay at work. And to care for the kids....
...

link: http://poststar.com/opinion/commentary/clinton-finds-herself-in-midst-of-welfare-reform/article_599bddbb-686e-5d58-88cd-6a3b8d859e7b.html

[CharlotteVale]

65. She's also saying that welfare recipients have no dignity.

She couldn't sound much more disgusting here.

[NorthCarolina]

70. In the Clinton's social circles, folks on Social Security are considered deadbeats.

This is no surprise. get a job Grandma...

[LiberalAndProud]

84. I've read the articles.

Her choice of words was unfortunate, because I believe she was speaking about perceptions. We all know they are out there. And to paraphrase, "Can we stop talking about "deadbeat" welfare queens and start talking about eliminating poverty, now?" is not belittling or hateful.

So I don't hold these words against her. There are many policy positions I disagree with Hillary about and for those positions I'll not be caucusing for her. But these kinds of character assassinations seem transparent to me and not terribly helpful to the discussion. It reeks of politicking, which I have come to hate.

[Cheese Sandwich]

88. Thank you for this comment.

Your point is actually quite reasonable and I can see how a reasonable person might come to that conclusion.

I disagree because the Clinton welfare reform was part of a war on working class people. And during those years the Democrats did take up some of this rhetoric about getting lazy people off welfare and ending dependency. And Hillary was a champion for welfare reform. It was wrong-headed policy and the rhetoric of lazy people abusing welfare is not very cool in my opinion.

But your opinion is also reasonable and I respect you saying it. Yes I suppose this is a sort of "politicking" but then again this is a legitimate concern many people have with the candidate. Thanks

[LiberalAndProud]

89. Your point is taken.

I do agree that the Welfare Reform Bill enacted under Bill Clinton was despicable, from the demonizing of the impoverished to the introduction of abstinence only curriculum in the classroom. And I am appalled to realize that only a Democrat could have accomplished it.

As I said, I disagree with Hillary Clinton on many, many things, but cherry-picking unfortunate word choices feeds the lizard mind in all of us. I prefer to discern.

[BainsBane]

110. Yes, it was part of a war, but I believe it a mistake to see the Clinton's

as the instigator of the war. Remember we were just coming off the Reagan-Bush years and American was very conservative at the time. The GOP had held the presidency for much of 20 years straight. It's not like there was a choice between an FDR and a Bill Clinton. It was Bush or Clinton. Bill Clinton indeed did appropriate some Republican policies, and that is why I did not vote for his re-election. However, the context today is different. Hillary is not supporting a more conservative husband who is president. She is running on her own platform that responds to today's political climate. The country has moved to the left, and that is a good thing.

Now I understand some like the fact that Bernie has remained constant for decades, and I can appreciate the idea that reflects integrity. However, I also believe a politician has a responsibility to represent the country as it exists today, to listen to the concerns of voters and respond accordingly. That is what Hillary Clinton is doing. I also think that is part of the reason she is more receptive to minority constituencies. Bernie has a deeply held set of beliefs, but they are less about responding to Democratic constituencies than his own values. Many here like Sanders because they see him as one of their own, as like them, with similar values. That's fine. It's completely their choice. I don't share that view about Sanders or any politician, though as a middle-aged woman I can relate to the mountain loads of shit Hillary has had to plow through to get where she is.

I believe they both have different strengths and weaknesses, and I resent the Manichean view of Hillary as evil and Bernie as perfect. You post a lot of one-dimensional hit pieces on Clinton, but in discussion you are far more reflective. I wish you demonstrated that same thoughtfulness in your OPs as well.

[BainsBane]

109. Sound points

and I appreciate your integrity on the issue of policy vs. gotcha politics.

[frylock]

87. Did Rhonda Costa grab her Gucci bag and drive her Cadillac to that interview at Salomon?

[Cheese Sandwich]

90. Debunked: People have wrongly claimed Hillary was only referring to "deadbeat dads"

So here is the 2002 interview piece cited where she talks about getting deadbeats off welfare, and there is nothing in it about dads or child support enforcement.

Original behind paywall here...
http://www.newspapers.com/newspage/19796257/

But republished in several newspapers and can be found in various online archives like this...
https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=TnshAAAAIBAJ&sjid=IYoFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1438%2C3320670


Or like this, complete at link but edited for length here by me. And this is not about "deadbeat dads":

Clinton finds herself in midst of welfare reform

April 16, 2002 12:00 am • MARIE COCCO(0) Comments
Newsday

WASHINGTON - This is when the Hillary lore meets Hillary the legislator.

Welfare reform is back.

It was one of those arguments six years ago in which Hillary Rodham Clinton could not catch a break. To the right, she was the shadowy operative of a leftist cabal in the White House, bent on keeping her own husband from fulfilling his promise to end welfare as we know it. 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."
...

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.

Congress must now reauthorize the landmark 1996 legislation...

The former welfare mothers are working. But they are still poor. About a third of those who left welfare report that they shrink their meals - or skip them altogether - because they haven't enough food. Even more say they can't pay the rent or the utility bills every month. The U.S. Conference of Mayors, in its annual report on hunger and homelessness, says welfare revision is an engine driving the working poor to the food pantries....


"Now the conversation should be about how do you make work pay? How do you reduce poverty?" the senator said. "Before, it was about this terrible welfare system, and that was a conversation stopper. It just blinded people to what some of the underlying problems were."

The underlying problems are still the underlying problems. Child care for the working poor remains scarce, and scarcely affordable. Transportation to jobs in the suburbs is spotty. State health insurance coverage for poor kids often is unavailable to their mothers, who must, nonetheless, stay healthy to stay at work. And to care for the kids....
...

link: http://poststar.com/opinion/commentary/clinton-finds-herself-in-midst-of-welfare-reform/article_599bddbb-686e-5d58-88cd-6a3b8d859e7b.html

[SidDithers]

93. ...

Keep trying.

Sid

[Zorra]

94. Very telling. This indicates utter contempt for disadvantaged folks of all kinds.

[Cheese Sandwich]

101. Indeed so. nt

[WDIM]

103. $29,000 a year working for a multi-billion dollar company.

The real deadbeats are the wage manipulators and the labor exploiters that run these companies and pay slave wages like that. The Pathetic greedy rich are the biggest deadbeats in this country.

[Cheese Sandwich]

118. +1000

This is another great point.

[rock]

111. Let me make sure I understand YOU

Your are saying there have never been deadbeats on welfare and therefore Hillary is ... What exactly? Readers want to know.

[Aerows]

115. The people being asked to vote for Hillary

want to know, actually, and they are far more important.

[Chickey]

122. I'm always called a "deadbeat"

I have:
Nail Patella Syndrome
Scoliosis
Kidney Disease
Rheumatoid Arthritis
Osteoarthritis
Hyperthyroidism

My sister and brother-in-law constant call me a "deadbeat" because I get disability. I recently quit my job because it was too much for me to handle. I am tired of feeling ashamed of being on disability but when you constantly see this shit (FB is a BAD place to be if you feel badly about your circumstances already), you can't help it, then you get depressed and even if you felt better physically, you've got yourself so down that it's difficult to move on days. I don't know why people, even people like Hillary, use such blanket terms, when it doesn't apply to everyone (at least I try to tell myself that). It's hard to live with sometimes.

[Chickey]

123. See... just today..

I swear I get this crap every other day! My brother-in-law today said, "I don't expect you to understand why I am opposed to paying anymore taxes, especially knowing that those taxes are just going to be handed over to someone else who did nothing to earn that money." My sister is no different.

THIS IS FAMILY! They crush me every other day or so. I just don't understand! I'd trade both of them my disabilities for a normal able body ANY F-N DAY!!

[Cheese Sandwich]

124. Hi and welcome to DU

I wish you luck.

This thread was pretty old and once they get so old you can't bump them up to the top so probably not too many people saw your post.

[Chickey]

125. Aww, thanks.

I was just venting. I got worse as the day went on. I don't like to talk badly about my family to others so I guess after I saw this post, it was a safe place and perfect timing to let-it-out.
Thanks again.

[Merryland]

126. Tell me she's not a Republican.

this is infuriating.

[Merryland]

128. Goldwater would be proud of his gal.

[azmom]

131. Kick