I’ve known it for years, and those persons who work in law enforcement, the fire service, EMS response, welfare fraud investigations, probation, parole, know one very important and salient thing:

Those persons deemed “poor” and who have been generationally not only dependent and expectant, but normed and standardized on welfare, aren’t really poor. It’s a lifestyle. A lifestyle they have purposely chosen, inculcated and interwoven into their families and friends, and a lifestyle that not only pays well but enables some families to live in better conditions than you and me. And a lifestyle choice that the governments — federal and state — have promoted with wild abandon over the years.

When Liberals started paying women for welfare babies, and greater amounts of money for more babies — absent fathers — then fathers became superfluous and costly. Liberals, frankly, killed the once-solid nuclear black family and denigrated black males. Black males became disenfranchised and unnecessary. So black males turned to each other. And thence to gangs.

And the gangbanger was born. Thanks to Liberals and Leftists across the nation.

And that gangbanging, defeatist, non-achieving, damaging mindset was embraced by all other then-minority classes, to include Mexicans (though Mexicans have a history of gangs — witness the Zoot Suit Riots in Los Angeles), Asians and finally Caucasoids.

I still think there’s nothing funnier than some white cracker kid with his pants below his butt, exposing dotted boxers, hat turned backwards, tatted-up with Olde English script, unlaced shoes, pierced eyebrows, saying “yo” and “know what I mean?” Dude, your future includes cleaning some of the finer bathrooms in a local county jail. Know what I mean?

And, in truth, what does modern American “poverty” truly denote (and I use the word “poverty” loosely and, clearly, in quotes)? From the National Review Online:

Modern Poverty Includes A.C. and an Xbox

July 18, 2011 10:39 A.M.

By Ken McIntyre

When Americans think of poverty, we tend to picture people who can’t adequately shelter, clothe, and feed themselves or their families.

When the Census Bureau defines “poverty,” though, it winds up painting more than 40 million Americans — one in seven — as “poor.”

Census officials continue to grossly exaggerate the numbers of the poor, creating a false picture in the public mind of widespread material deprivation, writes Heritage Foundation senior research fellow Robert Rector in a new paper.

“Most news stories on poverty feature homeless families, people living in crumbling shacks, or lines of the downtrodden eating in soup kitchens,” Rector says. “The actual living conditions of America’s poor are far different from these images.”

Congress is tying itself in knots figuring out how to cut spending and bring down a $14 trillion national debt. Lawmakers might well take a much closer look at the nearly a trillion dollars spent each year on welfare even though many recipients aren’t what the typical American would recognize as poor and in need of government assistance.

There is no widespread deprivation in the United States of America. There are no people living in cardboard boxes who aren’t single, male, mentally unbalanced and — still — some of them purposely choose to live like that. It’s a concept that many people can’t fathom but it’s true. A large percentile of the “homeless” choose to live their lives like that.

Each city and county has any number of publicly-funded programs (courtesy of your local, state and federal tax dollars) directly targeted at layer after layer of the “poor.” Only the truly insane don’t take advantage of those programs because they can’t comprehend them. And those persons comprise an infinitesimal percentile of the concerned population.

The “poor” in my county drive a Lexus, a Mercedes-Benz or the ever-popular BMW. 740s are quite popular with the “minorities” who are now a majority in my state. And funded by MY tax dollars. They live in rental multi-bedroom homes, condos, duplexes. Most do not live in high-unit apartment complexes because that’s beneath them.

To continue:

What is poverty? Americans might well be surprised to learn from other government data that the overwhelming majority of those defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau were well-housed and adequately fed even in the recession year 2009. About 4 percent of them did temporarily become homeless.

Data from the Department of Energy and other agencies show that the average poor family, as defined by Census officials:

● Lives in a home that is in good repair, not crowded, and equipped with air conditioning, clothes washer and dryer, and cable or satellite TV service.

● Prepares meals in a kitchen with a refrigerator, coffee maker and microwave as well as oven and stove.

● Enjoys two color TVs, a DVD player, VCR and — if children are there — an Xbox, PlayStation, or other video game system.

● Had enough money in the past year to meet essential needs, including adequate food and medical care.

You want to see actual squalor? You only have to watch the introductory minutes of the 2008 movie “The Incredible Hulk” starring Edward Norton. Those minutes introduce the slums of Rocinha, an “upscale” favela in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Americans historically and currently languishing in abject poverty? Bullshit. Unmitigated bullshit. Been there, done that, seen it all. And it’s a load of Leftist crap.

Above, a Shantytown in Kiberia, Kenya. Yes, these people live beneath paper and fabric and carpet and burning material in a public dump.

However, with this very important caveat:

When (not if) the federal and state governments pull back their rations of monthly Free Cheese to include physical support as well as monthly checks, there will be riots — by so-called “minorities” — who believe they are clearly entitled to Free. Generation after generation after generation.

They are the Lexus/iPhone welfare itinerants.

Except that they’re not itinerant, and they’re not poor.

Federal government statistics already prove this.

BZ

Mr Obama has no real plan.

Have you heard it? What is it?

Does it consist of anything more than spend and tax?

No. It does not.

Mr Obama has already said that he will clearly veto any spending cuts.

Obama officially threatens to veto Republicans’ ‘cut, cap and balance’ bill

By Sam Youngman – 07/18/11 03:58 PM ET

The White House on Monday warned President Obama will veto GOP legislation to “cut, cap and balance” spending and the budget.

I dare, thoughtlessly, to remind you of and reproduce the Top Ten Tenets of Liberalism, at the risk of being redundant:

That said, Harry Reid is currently excoriating the GOP for failing to extend the debt ceiling.

Imagine that.

Too bad that video and audio exists immuring past statements and positions. In that vein, I submit for your consideration now:

Harry Reid on raising the debt ceiling in 2006:

“If my Republican friends believe that increasing our debt by almost $800 billion today and more than $3 trillion over the last five years is the right thing to do, they should be upfront about it. They should explain why they think more debt is good for the economy.

How can the Republican majority in this Congress explain to their constituents that trillions of dollars in new debt is good for our economy? How can they explain that they think it’s fair to force our children, our grandchildren, our great grandchildren to finance this debt through higher taxes. That’s what it will have to be. Why is it right to increase our nation’s dependence on foreign creditors?

They should explain this. Maybe they can convince the public they’re right. I doubt it. Because most Americans know that increasing debt is the last thing we should be doing. After all, I repeat, the Baby Boomers are about to retire. Under the circumstances, any credible economist would tell you we should be reducing debt, not increasing it.Democrats won’t be making argument to supper this legalization, which will weaken our country. Weaken our county.”

I am of the opinion that TARP was a huge mistake, ALL the stimulus infusions were a huge mistake, cash for clunkers was a huge mistake, bailing out ANY fiduciary/banking agency was a HUGE mistake, bailing out ANY corporation was a HUGE mistake. It all should have been allowed to come to a much earlier staggering thump and heady crash; had that occurred, we would already be on the road to a kind of recovery that we’ve done nothing but delay.

When you delay this kind of thing, as Life generally goes, when the crash comes it will be larger, louder, longer and incredibly more painful.

This government can stop right now as far as I’m concerned, and the debt ceiling should never be raised again. The abject insanity simply has to stop. Anyone with a molecule of common sense knows you don’t spend to save money. Or get yourself out of debt. If this were a “given” there would be no foreclosures and no poor people. We’d just spend and spend and spend money we don’t have. That’s how insane it’s become.

No extension of the debt ceiling. Let the failure come, if it comes at all due to halting the debt ceiling explosion.

If anarchy comes, it won’t be from Caucasoid middle classes; it will come from those on welfare and sucking entitlements and Free Cheese in high-population centers, moms whose baby-daddies are well-armed gangbangers driving Lexuses and Mercedes and Donks of all shapes.

I live 91 miles away from where I work in a population center. I am well-armed, well-stocked, lots of ammo, and I’m old enough to be quite grouchy.

I can’t be any more succinct than that.

BZ

The president of the United States doesn’t know his own birthday.

Barack Hussein Obama was born, according to best known popular and unverified documents, on August 4th of 1961.

“Obama’s Senior Moment: I’ll Be Turning 50 In A Week“

Uh. No, you won’t. Try checking a calendar. Merely a humble suggestion.

From ABCNews.com:

Actually, he’ll be turning 50 in three weeks. His birthday is August 4, two days after the debt ceiling deadline. Senior moment?

And this completely incompetent and clueless man is in charge of not only our nuclear strike response, but the strongest nation on the planet?

I find myself speechless.

BZ

Most Conservatives have been saying and writing, consistently, that Obama’s bluff should be called in terms of the debt ceiling. I say: let the government tank. Refuse to allow the debt ceiling to be raised. The government, clearly, simply cannot continue on its unbridled spending spree.

Conservatives said this in re Bush’s TARP program. TARP = economic failure + no accountability. Conservatives said this about every iteration of Porkulus. Porkulus = economic failure + no accountability. As in: BILLIONS and BILLIONS of YOUR American Taxpayer Dollars WASTED. Because, as I wrote earlier: “I call American Taxpayers the New Niggers. You can be berated, cut, hurt, slashed, hacked, lynched, sacrificed — and government simply doesn’t much care. Purposely.”

“80% of the people support tax increases,” says Mr Obama. But he is delusional and a liar. He is a radical idealogue. How do you argue or attempt to reason with a soured mind such as this?

The answer is: you simply cannot. The bulk of the GOP just doesn’t “get” this point.

Further, Mr Obama’ admin and supporters have — get this — made two further illogical and nonsensical allegations:

• 1. No previous president has faced such a terrible hailstorm of disagreement;
• 2. It all stems from the fact that Mr Obama is a black man;

Except that Mr Obama is as “completely black” as I am completely Estonian. Mr Obama is “black” when it suits, and he is “other” when it suits.

Sheila Jackson Lee, a BLACK FEMALE Demorat Representative from Texas, says that, again, it all gets down to race:

Why is this president “different”?

And just exactly how many black Demorats currently exist in the US Senate?

Why, that would be none.

Lee is just another black apologist hack, by dint of Political Matching Melanin Necessity supportive of Racial Pimps and Poverty Pimps. Just another racist cheeseball in a female guise. With one radical exception: her melanin count doesn’t quite match that of The One.

Let’s go back just a bit, shall we? Remember when to “be black,” you had to be really black? And if you weren’t, you were a poseur? Questions were asked: “Is Obama actually black enough?” to satisfy hardcore blacks with wide noses, large lips, heavy accents, darker skins? Or would they simply hang their hats on what they were told? The answer “B” turned out to be correct.

Finally, Charles Krauthammer writes:

President Obama is demanding a big long-term budget deal. He won’t sign anything less, he warns, asking, “If not now, when?”

How about last December, when he ignored his own debt commission’s recommendations? How about February, when he presented a budget that increases debt by $10 trillion over the next decade? How about April, when he sought a debt-ceiling increase with zero debt reduction attached?

All of a sudden he’s a born-again budget balancer prepared to bravely take on his own party by making deep cuts in entitlements. Really? Name one. He’s been saying forever that he’s prepared to discuss, engage, converse about entitlement cuts. But never once has he publicly proposed a single structural change to any entitlement.

Let me summarize, if I might be so bold:

– Obama is a victim;
– Anyone opposing him is a racist;
– All will fall apart if The One doesn’t prevail

If I could be any more plain in my evaluatory efforts, please let me know. I value nothing if not brevity, truth and clarity.

Thank you for your continued reading and support.

BZ