goemaw.com

General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: MakeItRain on January 21, 2012, 09:10:08 PM

Title: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 21, 2012, 09:10:08 PM
that while he is "traveling the nation to every ethnic neighborhood" to talk about food stamps that there are more Whites on food stamps than blacks, Hispanics, or any other group.

Someone is going to have to explain to me why he is focusing this food stamp talking point on black people.  I can't help but to think he's a raging racist but I'm open to different viewpoints.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Cire on January 21, 2012, 09:19:38 PM
well, he is over 60 AND from the South.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 21, 2012, 09:57:38 PM
that while he is "traveling the nation to every ethnic neighborhood" to talk about food stamps that there are more Whites on food stamps than blacks, Hispanics, or any other group.

Someone is going to have to explain to me why he is focusing this food stamp talking point on black people.  I can't help but to think he's a raging racist but I'm open to different viewpoints.

Link?
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 21, 2012, 10:06:55 PM
Ok, it took some googling, but I think I found what you're getting all hysterical about. From MSNBC (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/06/10004332-2012-gingrich-goes-on-the-attack):

Quote
This morning on the CBS Early Show, Gingrich offered a defense, of sorts: Asked why he said African Americans are satisfied with food stamps, Gingrich retorted, "I said they shouldn't be … I didn't say they were satisfied. … I'm saying we should reach out to every American ... what I said was that every American ... every American of every background should have an opportunity to get a job, not depend on food stamps ... I'm actually for conservatives going into every ethnic neighborhood" to help people find more economic opportunities.”

So, his comment appears to be in response to a question specifically directed at the black community.

Also, another interesting tidbit from the article: apparently blacks (that's for you, OKCat) make up 28% of food stamp recipients, but they're only 12.6% of the population. That's impressive! Whites make up 60% of food stamp recipients, and make up 63.7% of the population. Numbers are fun.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 21, 2012, 10:17:18 PM
Ok, it took some googling, but I think I found what you're getting all hysterical about. From MSNBC (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/06/10004332-2012-gingrich-goes-on-the-attack):

Quote
This morning on the CBS Early Show, Gingrich offered a defense, of sorts: Asked why he said African Americans are satisfied with food stamps, Gingrich retorted, "I said they shouldn't be … I didn't say they were satisfied. … I'm saying we should reach out to every American ... what I said was that every American ... every American of every background should have an opportunity to get a job, not depend on food stamps ... I'm actually for conservatives going into every ethnic neighborhood" to help people find more economic opportunities.”

So, his comment appears to be in response to a question specifically directed at the black community.

Also, another interesting tidbit from the article: apparently blacks (that's for you, OKCat) make up 28% of food stamp recipients, but they're only 12.6% of the population. That's impressive! Whites make up 60% of food stamp recipients, and make up 63.7% of the population. Numbers are fun.

The quote in my post wasn't referring to any question it was from his victory speech tonight.  Also your quote confirmed what I said "there are more whites on food stamps than blacks.". So now that we've clarified really basic points for you, I'll ask again, differently.  If 60% of people on food stamps are white why is Newt focused on the 28% that are black?  It seems as if he wants to reform welfare he should focus on the 60% instead of the 28%.  It doesn't bother me at all that he's racist.  He's dragging out the primary season and if by chance the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party gives him the nomination all of his kooky crap will get him destroyed in a general.  He is an utter nightmare for moderate Republicans.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Cire on January 21, 2012, 10:23:33 PM
yeah, he has no chance against obama.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: felix rex on January 22, 2012, 12:21:38 AM
As long as he's in ethnic neighborhoods, somebody should really tell him to check out the local restaurants, too.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 22, 2012, 08:58:30 AM
Ok, it took some googling, but I think I found what you're getting all hysterical about. From MSNBC (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/06/10004332-2012-gingrich-goes-on-the-attack):

Quote
This morning on the CBS Early Show, Gingrich offered a defense, of sorts: Asked why he said African Americans are satisfied with food stamps, Gingrich retorted, "I said they shouldn't be … I didn't say they were satisfied. … I'm saying we should reach out to every American ... what I said was that every American ... every American of every background should have an opportunity to get a job, not depend on food stamps ... I'm actually for conservatives going into every ethnic neighborhood" to help people find more economic opportunities.”

So, his comment appears to be in response to a question specifically directed at the black community.

Also, another interesting tidbit from the article: apparently blacks (that's for you, OKCat) make up 28% of food stamp recipients, but they're only 12.6% of the population. That's impressive! Whites make up 60% of food stamp recipients, and make up 63.7% of the population. Numbers are fun.

The quote in my post wasn't referring to any question it was from his victory speech tonight.  Also your quote confirmed what I said "there are more whites on food stamps than blacks.". So now that we've clarified really basic points for you, I'll ask again, differently.  If 60% of people on food stamps are white why is Newt focused on the 28% that are black?  It seems as if he wants to reform welfare he should focus on the 60% instead of the 28%.  It doesn't bother me at all that he's racist.  He's dragging out the primary season and if by chance the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party gives him the nomination all of his kooky crap will get him destroyed in a general.  He is an utter nightmare for moderate Republicans.

Didn't watch. Can you link me to the video or transcript? I always like to review context before rendering judgment, as the quote above from MSNBC demonstrates. I don't support Gingrich, by the way, but I'm always skeptical when a lib starts hyperventilating over a comment by a Republican.

And regarding the 60% number, that doesn't tell the whole story, as I've already pointed out. Whites claim food stamps almost perfectly commensurate with their share of the overall population, a bit less actually. The percentage of blacks on food stamps more than doubles their share of the population. This is not exactly surprising, of course, since blacks suffer a much higher poverty rate than whites. I'm not interested in engaging in a debate over poverty or race - I'm simply tying to tell you that libs pointing to the fact that whites use food stamps in almost perfect alignment with their share of the population is idiotic.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: jmlynch1 on January 22, 2012, 10:31:33 AM
You can have a full time job and still require food stamps. I wonder what percentage of people on food stamps work full time?
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Stupid Fitz on January 22, 2012, 12:19:03 PM
You can have a full time job and still require food stamps. I wonder what percentage of people on food stamps work full time?

Very good question.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 22, 2012, 04:01:19 PM
Ok, it took some googling, but I think I found what you're getting all hysterical about. From MSNBC (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/06/10004332-2012-gingrich-goes-on-the-attack):

Quote
This morning on the CBS Early Show, Gingrich offered a defense, of sorts: Asked why he said African Americans are satisfied with food stamps, Gingrich retorted, "I said they shouldn't be … I didn't say they were satisfied. … I'm saying we should reach out to every American ... what I said was that every American ... every American of every background should have an opportunity to get a job, not depend on food stamps ... I'm actually for conservatives going into every ethnic neighborhood" to help people find more economic opportunities.”

So, his comment appears to be in response to a question specifically directed at the black community.

Also, another interesting tidbit from the article: apparently blacks (that's for you, OKCat) make up 28% of food stamp recipients, but they're only 12.6% of the population. That's impressive! Whites make up 60% of food stamp recipients, and make up 63.7% of the population. Numbers are fun.

The quote in my post wasn't referring to any question it was from his victory speech tonight.  Also your quote confirmed what I said "there are more whites on food stamps than blacks.". So now that we've clarified really basic points for you, I'll ask again, differently.  If 60% of people on food stamps are white why is Newt focused on the 28% that are black?  It seems as if he wants to reform welfare he should focus on the 60% instead of the 28%.  It doesn't bother me at all that he's racist.  He's dragging out the primary season and if by chance the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party gives him the nomination all of his kooky crap will get him destroyed in a general.  He is an utter nightmare for moderate Republicans.

Didn't watch. Can you link me to the video or transcript? I always like to review context before rendering judgment, as the quote above from MSNBC demonstrates. I don't support Gingrich, by the way, but I'm always skeptical when a lib starts hyperventilating over a comment by a Republican.

And regarding the 60% number, that doesn't tell the whole story, as I've already pointed out. Whites claim food stamps almost perfectly commensurate with their share of the overall population, a bit less actually. The percentage of blacks on food stamps more than doubles their share of the population. This is not exactly surprising, of course, since blacks suffer a much higher poverty rate than whites. I'm not interested in engaging in a debate over poverty or race - I'm simply tying to tell you that libs pointing to the fact that whites use food stamps in almost perfect alignment with their share of the population is idiotic.

Still waiting for that link. To add some more to the numbers I listed above, 31% of all blacks are on food stamps, or about 1 in 3. 14% of all whites (non-hispanic) are on food stamps, or 1 in 7. These are apples to apples numbers. The sheer number of a certain demographic on food stamps, without controlling for the size of the demographic, is meaningless.

Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 22, 2012, 05:15:58 PM
Ok, it took some googling, but I think I found what you're getting all hysterical about. From MSNBC (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/06/10004332-2012-gingrich-goes-on-the-attack):

Quote
This morning on the CBS Early Show, Gingrich offered a defense, of sorts: Asked why he said African Americans are satisfied with food stamps, Gingrich retorted, "I said they shouldn't be … I didn't say they were satisfied. … I'm saying we should reach out to every American ... what I said was that every American ... every American of every background should have an opportunity to get a job, not depend on food stamps ... I'm actually for conservatives going into every ethnic neighborhood" to help people find more economic opportunities.”

So, his comment appears to be in response to a question specifically directed at the black community.

Also, another interesting tidbit from the article: apparently blacks (that's for you, OKCat) make up 28% of food stamp recipients, but they're only 12.6% of the population. That's impressive! Whites make up 60% of food stamp recipients, and make up 63.7% of the population. Numbers are fun.

The quote in my post wasn't referring to any question it was from his victory speech tonight.  Also your quote confirmed what I said "there are more whites on food stamps than blacks.". So now that we've clarified really basic points for you, I'll ask again, differently.  If 60% of people on food stamps are white why is Newt focused on the 28% that are black?  It seems as if he wants to reform welfare he should focus on the 60% instead of the 28%.  It doesn't bother me at all that he's racist.  He's dragging out the primary season and if by chance the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party gives him the nomination all of his kooky crap will get him destroyed in a general.  He is an utter nightmare for moderate Republicans.

Didn't watch. Can you link me to the video or transcript? I always like to review context before rendering judgment, as the quote above from MSNBC demonstrates. I don't support Gingrich, by the way, but I'm always skeptical when a lib starts hyperventilating over a comment by a Republican.

And regarding the 60% number, that doesn't tell the whole story, as I've already pointed out. Whites claim food stamps almost perfectly commensurate with their share of the overall population, a bit less actually. The percentage of blacks on food stamps more than doubles their share of the population. This is not exactly surprising, of course, since blacks suffer a much higher poverty rate than whites. I'm not interested in engaging in a debate over poverty or race - I'm simply tying to tell you that libs pointing to the fact that whites use food stamps in almost perfect alignment with their share of the population is idiotic.

Still waiting for that link. To add some more to the numbers I listed above, 31% of all blacks are on food stamps, or about 1 in 3. 14% of all whites (non-hispanic) are on food stamps, or 1 in 7. These are apples to apples numbers. The sheer number of a certain demographic on food stamps, without controlling for the size of the demographic, is meaningless.



You are seriously the stupidest bad person on this board and that says a lot.  I told you the exact quote and told you that it was from his South Carolina Primary victory speech, if you're too stupid to use Google to find the speech I'm not going to help you.

Also knock it off with the percentage bullshit, it isn't ground breaking.  I simply stated that there are more whites on food stamps than blacks.  That's a fact like the earth is a planet and water is wet, stop trying to argue an absolute fact.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 22, 2012, 07:13:07 PM

Per usual, the left are the racists here.  Just because he's talking about the record number/percentage of people on food stamps in ObamaUSA, doesn't mean he's talking about black people.  JFC, grow a brain.

 :facepalm:

If you had a brain at all, you'd be trying to figure out why the eff so many people are on food stamps and how to get them off of it (perhaps fix the rough ridin' economy), instead you worry about what color people using food stamps are.  Libtards, yeesh.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 22, 2012, 07:30:21 PM
Ok, it took some googling, but I think I found what you're getting all hysterical about. From MSNBC (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/06/10004332-2012-gingrich-goes-on-the-attack):

Quote
This morning on the CBS Early Show, Gingrich offered a defense, of sorts: Asked why he said African Americans are satisfied with food stamps, Gingrich retorted, "I said they shouldn't be … I didn't say they were satisfied. … I'm saying we should reach out to every American ... what I said was that every American ... every American of every background should have an opportunity to get a job, not depend on food stamps ... I'm actually for conservatives going into every ethnic neighborhood" to help people find more economic opportunities.”

So, his comment appears to be in response to a question specifically directed at the black community.

Also, another interesting tidbit from the article: apparently blacks (that's for you, OKCat) make up 28% of food stamp recipients, but they're only 12.6% of the population. That's impressive! Whites make up 60% of food stamp recipients, and make up 63.7% of the population. Numbers are fun.

The quote in my post wasn't referring to any question it was from his victory speech tonight.  Also your quote confirmed what I said "there are more whites on food stamps than blacks.". So now that we've clarified really basic points for you, I'll ask again, differently.  If 60% of people on food stamps are white why is Newt focused on the 28% that are black?  It seems as if he wants to reform welfare he should focus on the 60% instead of the 28%.  It doesn't bother me at all that he's racist.  He's dragging out the primary season and if by chance the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party gives him the nomination all of his kooky crap will get him destroyed in a general.  He is an utter nightmare for moderate Republicans.

Didn't watch. Can you link me to the video or transcript? I always like to review context before rendering judgment, as the quote above from MSNBC demonstrates. I don't support Gingrich, by the way, but I'm always skeptical when a lib starts hyperventilating over a comment by a Republican.

And regarding the 60% number, that doesn't tell the whole story, as I've already pointed out. Whites claim food stamps almost perfectly commensurate with their share of the overall population, a bit less actually. The percentage of blacks on food stamps more than doubles their share of the population. This is not exactly surprising, of course, since blacks suffer a much higher poverty rate than whites. I'm not interested in engaging in a debate over poverty or race - I'm simply tying to tell you that libs pointing to the fact that whites use food stamps in almost perfect alignment with their share of the population is idiotic.

Still waiting for that link. To add some more to the numbers I listed above, 31% of all blacks are on food stamps, or about 1 in 3. 14% of all whites (non-hispanic) are on food stamps, or 1 in 7. These are apples to apples numbers. The sheer number of a certain demographic on food stamps, without controlling for the size of the demographic, is meaningless.



You are seriously the stupidest bad person on this board and that says a lot.  I told you the exact quote and told you that it was from his South Carolina Primary victory speech, if you're too stupid to use Google to find the speech I'm not going to help you.

Also knock it off with the percentage bullshit, it isn't ground breaking.  I simply stated that there are more whites on food stamps than blacks.  That's a fact like the earth is a planet and water is wet, stop trying to argue an absolute fact.

You supposedly quoted seven words - not even a full sentence. That is meaningless. If you want to make wild-eyed claims, back them up. Full quotes and links, please. I'm not going to watch an entire victory speech of a candidate I don't even care for just to verify your stupid claim.

I agree, you "simply stated" that there are more whites on food stamps than blacks, and that is indeed a fact, but what is your point? Are you suggesting that whites are more prone to use food stamps than blacks? That simply is not true when you use apples-to-apples to numbers. I thought you were "open to different viewpoints."
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: wildfratcountry on January 22, 2012, 07:57:03 PM
 :facepalm:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH0dZh0mpqM&feature=related
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/05/newt-gingrich-paychecks-food-stamps_n_1188193.html

There.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: felix rex on January 22, 2012, 08:04:40 PM
Maybe newt is being really broad in his definition of neighborhoods and considers frito pies "ethnic food".
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 22, 2012, 08:54:53 PM
:facepalm:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH0dZh0mpqM&feature=related
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/05/newt-gingrich-paychecks-food-stamps_n_1188193.html

There.

Thanks. Neither of these is from Gingi's SC victory speech, so maybe MIR has something to add?

Anyway, from the links you provided:

Quote
Gingrich told a town hall meeting at a senior center in Plymouth, N.H., that if the NAACP invites him to its annual convention this year, he'd go there and talk about "why the African-American community should demand paychecks and not be satisfied with food stamps." (1 in 3 blacks is on food stamps.)

He also said he'd pitch a new Social Security program aimed at helping young people, particularly African-American males, who he said get the smallest return on Social Security. (True.)

What's everybody pissed about? :dunno:
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 22, 2012, 11:26:17 PM
I gave you the quote, the context, and when it was said.  You questioned my contextual use, you can type six words into any search engine to find what you're looking for, I'm not doing for you.

I also told you in the very first post why I'm pointing out that there are more whites on food stamps than blacks, not going to do that again either.  My point is correct I was really just wondering what mindless robotic Fox bot would try to refute what I was pointing out.  Grats you win, I was hoping to catch more of you, I got one, meh.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: nicname on January 23, 2012, 12:36:23 AM
Story about foodstamps;

My sis-in-law has been on food stamps for like 3 years.  She isn't poor though, she works part-time and goes to nursing school.  Her husband is in the military and with the great benefits they get they make pretty good money.  Thing is she lies and says that they are seperated just not divorced and that she is raising the kids on her own.  I don't know how she gets away with it.  I guess it is because he has been deployed for 2 of the last three years and stayed on base for 6 months when he was stateside.  Anyway, chick gets like $450/ month on a vision card.  She buys so much food that when she gets home from the store she usually has to throw crap out just to make room for the new crap.  BTW, mostly all of it is processed, premade crap and snacks.  She's white.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: jtksu on January 23, 2012, 02:11:45 AM
Re: the percentage of people receiving food stamps-  I doubt anyone actually will but I suggest you read "Nickel and Dimed.  On (Not) Getting By In America."  Working fulltime at low pay rates doesn't disqualify a person for SRS benefits.  It's pretty sad that a person can work 40 hrs and not brinng home enough to be considered above the poverty level.  Good read.  (Also-  feel free to add the obligatory Carter/JT is racist pics.  TIA!)
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 23, 2012, 07:49:45 AM
I gave you the quote, the context, and when it was said.  You questioned my contextual use, you can type six words into any search engine to find what you're looking for, I'm not doing for you.

I also told you in the very first post why I'm pointing out that there are more whites on food stamps than blacks, not going to do that again either.  My point is correct I was really just wondering what mindless robotic Fox bot would try to refute what I was pointing out.  Grats you win, I was hoping to catch more of you, I got one, meh.

And there's the tap out. Let's try this one more time: As I said above, I tried to Google your six words since you would not provide a link, and the best I could find was the MSNBC article posted above. The quote in that article was completely innocuous, and I found no link to a SC victory speech as you claim. Until you prove otherwise, you are completely full of sh*t.

Second, I don't think you understand the word context. According to Websters, it is "something liberals have no regard for when quoting conservatives." You provided none, let alone a full quote.

Third, your "point," such as it is, is asinine, as I've demonstrated in several posts above, because it is not an apples-to-apples comparison. 1 in 3 blacks on food stamps, versus 1 in 7 whites. If you want to argue that there is a legitimate reason for the depressingly high level of black poverty in this county, that's a different issue. Just don't try to justify black food stamp usage by pointing to whites, who use far less as a percentage of population. That is just stupid. You are embarrassing yourself.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: LickNeckey on January 23, 2012, 10:25:07 AM
talked with a pilot the other day.  he explained the plight of young pilots who must fly cargo and pick up any extra commercial flights. 

these early jobs apparenty pay very little (23-29k annually) and pilots must take gov assisstance to make it.

also said that he was discouraged from wearing his uniform when going to the welfare office as it generally pissed off the workers
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 23, 2012, 10:27:06 AM
talked with a pilot the other day.  he explained the plight of young pilots who must fly cargo and pick up any extra commercial flights. 

these early jobs apparenty pay very little (23-29k annually) and pilots must take gov assisstance to make it.

also said that he was discouraged from wearing his uniform when going to the welfare office as it generally pissed off the workers

I would wear my uniform to the welfare office every time if somebody told me that.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 23, 2012, 11:21:42 AM
talked with a pilot the other day.  he explained the plight of young pilots who must fly cargo and pick up any extra commercial flights. 

these early jobs apparenty pay very little (23-29k annually) and pilots must take gov assisstance to make it.

also said that he was discouraged from wearing his uniform when going to the welfare office as it generally pissed off the workers

Yeah, I've heard it sucks to be a pilot now, especially a young one. You can make that much driving a bus. Sounds like it would have been a pretty awesome job a few decades ago, though.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Kat Kid on January 23, 2012, 11:35:54 AM
talked with a pilot the other day.  he explained the plight of young pilots who must fly cargo and pick up any extra commercial flights. 

these early jobs apparenty pay very little (23-29k annually) and pilots must take gov assisstance to make it.

also said that he was discouraged from wearing his uniform when going to the welfare office as it generally pissed off the workers

Yeah, I've heard it sucks to be a pilot now, especially a young one. You can make that much driving a bus. Sounds like it would have been a pretty awesome job a few decades ago, though.


Man, those airline unions are out of control.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: AbeFroman on January 23, 2012, 11:38:14 AM
Story about foodstamps;

My sis-in-law has been on food stamps for like 3 years.  She isn't poor though, she works part-time and goes to nursing school.  Her husband is in the military and with the great benefits they get they make pretty good money.  Thing is she lies and says that they are seperated just not divorced and that she is raising the kids on her own.  I don't know how she gets away with it.  I guess it is because he has been deployed for 2 of the last three years and stayed on base for 6 months when he was stateside.  Anyway, chick gets like $450/ month on a vision card.  She buys so much food that when she gets home from the store she usually has to throw crap out just to make room for the new crap.  BTW, mostly all of it is processed, premade crap and snacks.  She's white.

What a $!#*. She should be spending that $450 on quality stuff from Whole Foods
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 23, 2012, 08:53:34 PM
I gave you the quote, the context, and when it was said.  You questioned my contextual use, you can type six words into any search engine to find what you're looking for, I'm not doing for you.

I also told you in the very first post why I'm pointing out that there are more whites on food stamps than blacks, not going to do that again either.  My point is correct I was really just wondering what mindless robotic Fox bot would try to refute what I was pointing out.  Grats you win, I was hoping to catch more of you, I got one, meh.

And there's the tap out. Let's try this one more time: As I said above, I tried to Google your six words since you would not provide a link, and the best I could find was the MSNBC article posted above. The quote in that article was completely innocuous, and I found no link to a SC victory speech as you claim. Until you prove otherwise, you are completely full of sh*t.

Second, I don't think you understand the word context. According to Websters, it is "something liberals have no regard for when quoting conservatives." You provided none, let alone a full quote.

Third, your "point," such as it is, is asinine, as I've demonstrated in several posts above, because it is not an apples-to-apples comparison. 1 in 3 blacks on food stamps, versus 1 in 7 whites. If you want to argue that there is a legitimate reason for the depressingly high level of black poverty in this county, that's a different issue. Just don't try to justify black food stamp usage by pointing to whites, who use far less as a percentage of population. That is just stupid. You are embarrassing yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nYoqe-VjvQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nYoqe-VjvQ)
Christ man, you can't be that helpless can you?  Also why do you keep insisting that I took Newt out of context when you have no clue what the actual context is?  You shouldn't even waste your time watching the video for the sake of continuing this conversation, I'm making a very basic irrefutable point that you clearly aren't getting.  It isn't about voodoo math or stat tricks.  You aren't getting this through your titanium skull, what I can't figure out is if your act is intentional or not?

Have you thought about why none of your like minded peers have yet to post on this topic?  You're drowning sometimes its okay to quit.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 23, 2012, 09:52:40 PM
I gave you the quote, the context, and when it was said.  You questioned my contextual use, you can type six words into any search engine to find what you're looking for, I'm not doing for you.

I also told you in the very first post why I'm pointing out that there are more whites on food stamps than blacks, not going to do that again either.  My point is correct I was really just wondering what mindless robotic Fox bot would try to refute what I was pointing out.  Grats you win, I was hoping to catch more of you, I got one, meh.

And there's the tap out. Let's try this one more time: As I said above, I tried to Google your six words since you would not provide a link, and the best I could find was the MSNBC article posted above. The quote in that article was completely innocuous, and I found no link to a SC victory speech as you claim. Until you prove otherwise, you are completely full of sh*t.

Second, I don't think you understand the word context. According to Websters, it is "something liberals have no regard for when quoting conservatives." You provided none, let alone a full quote.

Third, your "point," such as it is, is asinine, as I've demonstrated in several posts above, because it is not an apples-to-apples comparison. 1 in 3 blacks on food stamps, versus 1 in 7 whites. If you want to argue that there is a legitimate reason for the depressingly high level of black poverty in this county, that's a different issue. Just don't try to justify black food stamp usage by pointing to whites, who use far less as a percentage of population. That is just stupid. You are embarrassing yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nYoqe-VjvQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nYoqe-VjvQ)
Christ man, you can't be that helpless can you?  Also why do you keep insisting that I took Newt out of context when you have no clue what the actual context is?  You shouldn't even waste your time watching the video for the sake of continuing this conversation, I'm making a very basic irrefutable point that you clearly aren't getting.  It isn't about voodoo math or stat tricks.  You aren't getting this through your titanium skull, what I can't figure out is if your act is intentional or not?

Have you thought about why none of your like minded peers have yet to post on this topic?  You're drowning sometimes its okay to quit.

God dammit, MIR, I just had to sit through that entire 24 minute video just to figure out that you completely misquoted Gingi. What he actually says, at 15:40, is "I would like to be the best paycheck president in American history. And I want to go into every neighborhood of every ethnic background in every part of the country and say to people very simply: if you want your children to have a life of dependency and food stamps, you have a candidate, its Barack Obama. If you want your children to have a life of independence and paychecks, you have a candidate, its Newt Gingrich. And I'll bet you we have votes everywhere." White is an ethnic background, dumbshit.

Finally, I love how pointing out that whites utilize food stamps, as a share of the population, far less than blacks, is "voodoo math or stat tricks." Oh, the diseased mind of a liberal....
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 23, 2012, 10:53:43 PM
"White is an ethnic background, dumbshit"

With that I think we're done here.  This is so maddingly stupid, there is literally nothing I can add to this thread.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: sys on January 23, 2012, 11:12:29 PM
"White is an ethnic background, dumbshit"

With that I think we're done here.  This is so maddingly stupid, there is literally nothing I can add to this thread.

it's not stupid, it's dishonest.  i love stupid posters, because it is fun to lol @ them.  i hate the posters that pretend to be stupid, because they waste everyone's time and lower the level of the discussion.

also, govts shouldn't incentivize having children.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: nicname on January 24, 2012, 01:06:25 AM
Dumb of MIR to mention the white vs blacks food stamps thing.

Dumber of the other dude to post that last debacle, though he was right earlier.

Food Stamps shouldn't be the problem of the federal government,
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: nicname on January 24, 2012, 01:18:52 AM
Also, Newt is smart, and not a dumbass.  He is a piece of crap though and knowingly said that stuff to earn the favor of IMO a pretty racist crowd, and state of voters.  These were the same people who had earlier booed the golden rule.  They call themselves evangelicals.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 24, 2012, 09:07:29 AM
Yeah, sorry, I meant to say that whites must, by definition, be included in "every ethnic background," the same as all other people. There is nothing racist or discriminatory about that quote.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: sys on January 24, 2012, 03:08:23 PM
There is nothing racist or discriminatory about that quote.

give me a rough ridin' break.  you're not a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) (at least not this Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)), you know perfectly well why a political candidate, campaigning in south carolina, wants to go around mentioning "ethnic backgrounds" and food stamps in the same sentence.

it's a fine line in 2012, being racist enough to get racists to vote for you, but not so overtly racist that people that would prefer not to think of themselves as racist are slapped in the face with it.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 24, 2012, 03:39:56 PM
There is nothing racist or discriminatory about that quote.

give me a rough ridin' break.  you're not a respect (at least not this Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)), you know perfectly well why a political candidate, campaigning in south carolina, wants to go around mentioning "ethnic backgrounds" and food stamps in the same sentence.

it's a fine line in 2012, being racist enough to get racists to vote for you, but not so overtly racist that people that would prefer not to think of themselves as racist are slapped in the face with it.

Seems to me like he intentionally said "every ethnic background" so as not to be accused of racism. Just can't win with the liberal grievance mongers.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: felix rex on January 24, 2012, 04:36:44 PM
There is nothing racist or discriminatory about that quote.

give me a rough ridin' break.  you're not a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) (at least not this Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)), you know perfectly well why a political candidate, campaigning in south carolina, wants to go around mentioning "ethnic backgrounds" and food stamps in the same sentence.

it's a fine line in 2012, being racist enough to get racists to vote for you, but not so overtly racist that people that would prefer not to think of themselves as racist are slapped in the face with it.

The ability to walk this line so delicately is what I admire most about newt.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 24, 2012, 05:22:23 PM
There is nothing racist or discriminatory about that quote.

give me a rough ridin' break.  you're not a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) (at least not this Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)), you know perfectly well why a political candidate, campaigning in south carolina, wants to go around mentioning "ethnic backgrounds" and food stamps in the same sentence.

it's a fine line in 2012, being racist enough to get racists to vote for you, but not so overtly racist that people that would prefer not to think of themselves as racist are slapped in the face with it.

The ability to walk this line so delicately is what I admire most about newt.

It's an outstanding tactic, as I said earlier this stuff works great in primary season, it will get him killed in a general.  He's energizing the LCD that will be great until the day after Super Tuesday.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: felix rex on January 24, 2012, 05:34:07 PM
Also, "delicately" was the wrong word. I think I was going for "brazenly".

And yeah. Huge lol at Gingrich winning a general election. He's totally rough ridin' over the republican party at this point. Deep down, he probably knows that but just doesn't give a crap. Which I also admire.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 24, 2012, 05:40:13 PM
Also, Newt is smart, and not a dumbass.  He is a piece of crap though and knowingly said that stuff to earn the favor of IMO a pretty racist crowd, and state of voters.  These were the same people who had earlier booed the golden rule.  They call themselves evangelicals.

Jesus rough ridin' Christ Nic, how can you say I'm dumb one post and completely agree with me the next?  I don't know what "blacks vs. whites food stamps things" is but I wasn't pitting race against race or even debating the merits of who should or shouldn't have food stamps.  I simply pointed out that Newt's quote in his speech took an everyone issue and quite clearly made it a black issue.  Quite simply put "going to every ethnic neighborhood" to talk about the issue of food stamps is disingenuous at best, because he knows there are more white people on food stamps than any and every ethnic group.

It's a lot easier to energize these stupid, mayo loving, evangelical crackers on the concept of welfare being a black issue than an everybody issue.  He knows this and like I said disingenuous at best racist at worst and likely a combination of the two.

Frankly I've never understood why anyone cares who is on welfare or not.  I have money but wouldn't be considered rich, but Barack Obama being the food stamp president hasn't stopped me from owning houses, cars, taking vacations, having season tickets, etc.  You would think people would be more outraged about multi million dollar companies who legally don't have to pay taxes.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: felix rex on January 24, 2012, 06:12:13 PM
Also, Newt is smart, and not a dumbass.  He is a piece of crap though and knowingly said that stuff to earn the favor of IMO a pretty racist crowd, and state of voters.  These were the same people who had earlier booed the golden rule.  They call themselves evangelicals.
You would think people would be more outraged about multi million dollar companies who legally don't have to pay taxes.

I saw a bunch of angry white people outraged about this in dc. And most of them could have benefited from some soap stamps.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 24, 2012, 06:15:46 PM
"..and I want to go into every neighborhood, of every ethnic background, in every part of the country, and say to people very simply, if you want to have your children live a life of dependency and food stamps, you have a candidate that's Barrack Obama. If you want your children to have a life of in-dependency and paychecks, you have a candidate that's Newt Gingrich..."

IMO, this is a case of liberal "mis-spoke" or "poor choice of words", or "if he had it to do over again".  It seems obvious that with his choice of words, he was actually trying to be inclusive of everyone by saying "of every ethnic background",   but today's definition of "ethnic" seems to encompass everyone except white.  It really doesn't matter though, because Romney will be the nominee, but I'm sure at some point he will say something unintentionally racist as well.  :frown:
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 24, 2012, 06:53:57 PM
"..and I want to go into every neighborhood, of every ethnic background, in every part of the country, and say to people very simply, if you want to have your children live a life of dependency and food stamps, you have a candidate that's Barrack Obama. If you want your children to have a life of in-dependency and paychecks, you have a candidate that's Newt Gingrich..."

IMO, this is a case of liberal "mis-spoke" or "poor choice of words", or "if he had it to do over again".  It seems obvious that with his choice of words, he was actually trying to be inclusive of everyone by saying "of every ethnic background",   but today's definition of "ethnic" seems to encompass everyone except white.  It really doesn't matter though, because Romney will be the nominee, but I'm sure at some point he will say something unintentionally racist as well.  :frown:

Ethnic has always been used to describe a minority group.  Before blacks and hispanics were thoughts of as equals, ethnic referred to Italians and the Irish who were the win-class before civil rights laws.  The 60's did for Italians and Irish what immigration reform did for blacks and 9/11 did for Mexicans.

Romney won't say anything that will be construed as racist, nor did McCain.  Your comment is quite ironic considering the last Presidential election it was wacko republicans calling the democrat nominee a racist, not vice versa.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Stupid Fitz on January 24, 2012, 06:57:33 PM
Also, Newt is smart, and not a dumbass.  He is a piece of crap though and knowingly said that stuff to earn the favor of IMO a pretty racist crowd, and state of voters.  These were the same people who had earlier booed the golden rule.  They call themselves evangelicals.
You would think people would be more outraged about multi million dollar companies who legally don't have to pay taxes.

I saw a bunch of angry white people outraged about this in dc. And most of them could have benefited from some soap stamps.

lol
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: 06wildcat on January 24, 2012, 07:21:37 PM
What normal people see in the quote: Newt has gone full Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on the Southern strategy.

What KSU sees: Newt's not in any way a racist. He's just No. 1 with racists.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 24, 2012, 07:51:14 PM
Also, Newt is smart, and not a dumbass.  He is a piece of crap though and knowingly said that stuff to earn the favor of IMO a pretty racist crowd, and state of voters.  These were the same people who had earlier booed the golden rule.  They call themselves evangelicals.
You would think people would be more outraged about multi million dollar companies who legally don't have to pay taxes.

I saw a bunch of angry white people outraged about this in dc. And most of them could have benefited from some soap stamps.

lol

Yeah, that was an amazing line
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 24, 2012, 07:55:56 PM

Attention Race Baiting Retards: It's Not About Your Race, It's Your Attitude, STFU                                                k   thx
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Trim on January 24, 2012, 08:21:05 PM
From what I can remember, MIR started this "mayo-loving = racist cracker" thing shortly after we had a pre-game dinner at r-a-b where I'm pretty sure I got mayo on my belly buster.

:horrorsurprise:
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: sys on January 24, 2012, 08:24:13 PM
Seems to me like he intentionally said "every ethnic background" so as not to be accused of racism. Just can't win with the liberal grievance mongers.

i stand corrected, i see now it's not such a fine line.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 24, 2012, 09:04:32 PM
Seems to me like he intentionally said "every ethnic background" so as not to be accused of racism. Just can't win with the liberal grievance mongers.

i stand corrected, i see now it's not such a fine line.

tone down the non-negro dialect please
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 24, 2012, 10:05:16 PM
"..and I want to go into every neighborhood, of every ethnic background, in every part of the country, and say to people very simply, if you want to have your children live a life of dependency and food stamps, you have a candidate that's Barrack Obama. If you want your children to have a life of in-dependency and paychecks, you have a candidate that's Newt Gingrich..."

IMO, this is a case of liberal "mis-spoke" or "poor choice of words", or "if he had it to do over again".  It seems obvious that with his choice of words, he was actually trying to be inclusive of everyone by saying "of every ethnic background",   but today's definition of "ethnic" seems to encompass everyone except white.  It really doesn't matter though, because Romney will be the nominee, but I'm sure at some point he will say something unintentionally racist as well.  :frown:

Ethnic has always been used to describe a minority group.  Before blacks and hispanics were thoughts of as equals, ethnic referred to Italians and the Irish who were the win-class before civil rights laws.  The 60's did for Italians and Irish what immigration reform did for blacks and 9/11 did for Mexicans.

Romney won't say anything that will be construed as racist, nor did McCain.  Your comment is quite ironic considering the last Presidential election it was wacko republicans calling the democrat nominee a racist, not vice versa.

Yes, ethnicity used to apply to all races, including white.

You are right, Romney will not intentionally say anything racist.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: the KHAN! on January 24, 2012, 10:14:58 PM
Ok, it took some googling, but I think I found what you're getting all hysterical about. From MSNBC (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/06/10004332-2012-gingrich-goes-on-the-attack):

Quote
This morning on the CBS Early Show, Gingrich offered a defense, of sorts: Asked why he said African Americans are satisfied with food stamps, Gingrich retorted, "I said they shouldn't be … I didn't say they were satisfied. … I'm saying we should reach out to every American ... what I said was that every American ... every American of every background should have an opportunity to get a job, not depend on food stamps ... I'm actually for conservatives going into every ethnic neighborhood" to help people find more economic opportunities.”

So, his comment appears to be in response to a question specifically directed at the black community.

Also, another interesting tidbit from the article: apparently blacks (that's for you, OKCat) make up 28% of food stamp recipients, but they're only 12.6% of the population. That's impressive! Whites make up 60% of food stamp recipients, and make up 63.7% of the population. Numbers are fun.

The quote in my post wasn't referring to any question it was from his victory speech tonight.  Also your quote confirmed what I said "there are more whites on food stamps than blacks.". So now that we've clarified really basic points for you, I'll ask again, differently.  If 60% of people on food stamps are white why is Newt focused on the 28% that are black?  It seems as if he wants to reform welfare he should focus on the 60% instead of the 28%.  It doesn't bother me at all that he's racist.  He's dragging out the primary season and if by chance the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party gives him the nomination all of his kooky crap will get him destroyed in a general.  He is an utter nightmare for moderate Republicans.

Didn't watch. Can you link me to the video or transcript? I always like to review context before rendering judgment, as the quote above from MSNBC demonstrates. I don't support Gingrich, by the way, but I'm always skeptical when a lib starts hyperventilating over a comment by a Republican.

And regarding the 60% number, that doesn't tell the whole story, as I've already pointed out. Whites claim food stamps almost perfectly commensurate with their share of the overall population, a bit less actually. The percentage of blacks on food stamps more than doubles their share of the population. This is not exactly surprising, of course, since blacks suffer a much higher poverty rate than whites. I'm not interested in engaging in a debate over poverty or race - I'm simply tying to tell you that libs pointing to the fact that whites use food stamps in almost perfect alignment with their share of the population is idiotic.

Still waiting for that link. To add some more to the numbers I listed above, 31% of all blacks are on food stamps, or about 1 in 3. 14% of all whites (non-hispanic) are on food stamps, or 1 in 7. These are apples to apples numbers. The sheer number of a certain demographic on food stamps, without controlling for the size of the demographic, is meaningless.



You are seriously the stupidest bad person on this board and that says a lot.  I told you the exact quote and told you that it was from his South Carolina Primary victory speech, if you're too stupid to use Google to find the speech I'm not going to help you.

Also knock it off with the percentage bullshit, it isn't ground breaking.  I simply stated that there are more whites on food stamps than blacks.  That's a fact like the earth is a planet and water is wet, stop trying to argue an absolute fact.

Make It Rain, you might actually be Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).

Statistics have meaning, whether you like it or not. The fact the percentage of blacks when compared to those who use foodstamps is double the percentage of blacks in America should tell you that there's a social problem.

Just shut the eff up and take a social science class then we can talk.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: nicname on January 24, 2012, 11:16:14 PM
Also, Newt is smart, and not a dumbass.  He is a piece of crap though and knowingly said that stuff to earn the favor of IMO a pretty racist crowd, and state of voters.  These were the same people who had earlier booed the golden rule.  They call themselves evangelicals.

Jesus rough ridin' Christ Nic, how can you say I'm dumb one post and completely agree with me the next?  I don't know what "blacks vs. whites food stamps things" is but I wasn't pitting race against race or even debating the merits of who should or shouldn't have food stamps.  I simply pointed out that Newt's quote in his speech took an everyone issue and quite clearly made it a black issue.  Quite simply put "going to every ethnic neighborhood" to talk about the issue of food stamps is disingenuous at best, because he knows there are more white people on food stamps than any and every ethnic group.

It's a lot easier to energize these stupid, mayo loving, evangelical crackers on the concept of welfare being a black issue than an everybody issue.  He knows this and like I said disingenuous at best racist at worst and likely a combination of the two.

Frankly I've never understood why anyone cares who is on welfare or not.  I have money but wouldn't be considered rich, but Barack Obama being the food stamp president hasn't stopped me from owning houses, cars, taking vacations, having season tickets, etc.  You would think people would be more outraged about multi million dollar companies who legally don't have to pay taxes.

Because, while i agree with you on Newt's motives I think it was dumb of you to point out that more whites are on foodstamps than blacks.  Just pointing out the racial undertones of what he said gets the point across well enough.  Using those numbers actually detracts from the argument because they are flawed.  If a higher percentage of whites were on foodstamps than minorities then I would have no problem with you using them to prove your point.  Actually, had that been the case it would have driven it home right now.

Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: nicname on January 24, 2012, 11:20:17 PM
Also, "delicately" was the wrong word. I think I was going for "brazenly".

And yeah. Huge lol at Gingrich winning a general election. He's totally rough ridin' over the republican party at this point. Deep down, he probably knows that but just doesn't give a crap. Which I also admire.

He's such an incredibly horrible person, yet so smart.  He's like a diabolical political genius from some low rent action comedy. 

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.sodahead.com%2Fpolls%2F002413273%2F4849531360_Gingrich_Laughing_350x233_xlarge.jpeg&hash=2f5694a5076dd609f086226f94dba844e2e7f962)
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 25, 2012, 01:09:51 AM
Also, Newt is smart, and not a dumbass.  He is a piece of crap though and knowingly said that stuff to earn the favor of IMO a pretty racist crowd, and state of voters.  These were the same people who had earlier booed the golden rule.  They call themselves evangelicals.

Jesus rough ridin' Christ Nic, how can you say I'm dumb one post and completely agree with me the next?  I don't know what "blacks vs. whites food stamps things" is but I wasn't pitting race against race or even debating the merits of who should or shouldn't have food stamps.  I simply pointed out that Newt's quote in his speech took an everyone issue and quite clearly made it a black issue.  Quite simply put "going to every ethnic neighborhood" to talk about the issue of food stamps is disingenuous at best, because he knows there are more white people on food stamps than any and every ethnic group.

It's a lot easier to energize these stupid, mayo loving, evangelical crackers on the concept of welfare being a black issue than an everybody issue.  He knows this and like I said disingenuous at best racist at worst and likely a combination of the two.

Frankly I've never understood why anyone cares who is on welfare or not.  I have money but wouldn't be considered rich, but Barack Obama being the food stamp president hasn't stopped me from owning houses, cars, taking vacations, having season tickets, etc.  You would think people would be more outraged about multi million dollar companies who legally don't have to pay taxes.

Because, while i agree with you on Newt's motives I think it was dumb of you to point out that more whites are on foodstamps than blacks.  Just pointing out the racial undertones of what he said gets the point across well enough.  Using those numbers actually detracts from the argument because they are flawed.  If a higher percentage of whites were on foodstamps than minorities then I would have no problem with you using them to prove your point.  Actually, had that been the case it would have driven it home right now.



Nic!  It is quite clear that you aren't getting the point.  Again I fully understand that there are a disproportionate amount of blacks on welfare, that isn't breaking news.  eff man I'm black, I'm perfectly aware with the social ills facing blacks.  What next, are you going to try to convince me that there are a lot of blacks in jail?  Do black males have short life expectancy?  Help me out.

I'm going to try this one more time for you and that moron the KHAN.  The reason why it is relevant that there are more whites on welfare is that in the context of Gingrich's comments he was discussing the financial impact of this country of people receiving welfare.  If you are concerned about the fiscal aspect of welfare and insist on focusing on groups of people and not all people I would think your focus should be the majority group.  If he was talking about the social impact of welfare then yes, the group with the larger percentage of recipients within that group should be the focus of the talking point.

I'll put this another way to help KHAN:

Assuming 62% of welfare recipients are white and 38% of recipients are everyone else and you want to minimize the impact of welfare on the American economy do you focus on the 62 or the 38?  The answer should be pretty simple.  I'd rather focus on the 100% but it is Newt who insists on separating groups, not me.

Now let's assume that 27% of all whites are receiving welfare and 56% of all blacks receive welfare.  If Newt's focus was on the social ills of welfare then it would be more appropriate to focus on the group of the larger percentage of its people on welfare.  Again even using the social ills argument I wouldn't put people into ethnic/racial groups because its 2012 blacks don't just live with blacks anymore, if welfare is a black problem because it leads to crime and blight its everyone's problem.

So Nic and KHAN; I, me, MIR has focused on the perceived fiscal impact on welfare because Newt has.  I have not yet once focused on the social impact of welfare so how many blacks on welfare isn't very relevant to this conversation.  I intentionally didn't discuss the social aspect of this because people would go full Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).  So stop lashing out at me because you guys didn't see the speech and aren't understanding the topic at hand.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: felix rex on January 25, 2012, 05:14:07 AM
Also, "delicately" was the wrong word. I think I was going for "brazenly".

And yeah. Huge lol at Gingrich winning a general election. He's totally rough ridin' over the republican party at this point. Deep down, he probably knows that but just doesn't give a crap. Which I also admire.

He's such an incredibly horrible person, yet so smart.  He's like a diabolical political genius from some low rent action comedy. 

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.sodahead.com%2Fpolls%2F002413273%2F4849531360_Gingrich_Laughing_350x233_xlarge.jpeg&hash=2f5694a5076dd609f086226f94dba844e2e7f962)

Yes. He is a caricature and it's almost like he's daring the country to elect him in order to prove a point about the country.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: nicname on January 25, 2012, 11:21:59 AM
Also, Newt is smart, and not a dumbass.  He is a piece of crap though and knowingly said that stuff to earn the favor of IMO a pretty racist crowd, and state of voters.  These were the same people who had earlier booed the golden rule.  They call themselves evangelicals.

Jesus rough ridin' Christ Nic, how can you say I'm dumb one post and completely agree with me the next?  I don't know what "blacks vs. whites food stamps things" is but I wasn't pitting race against race or even debating the merits of who should or shouldn't have food stamps.  I simply pointed out that Newt's quote in his speech took an everyone issue and quite clearly made it a black issue.  Quite simply put "going to every ethnic neighborhood" to talk about the issue of food stamps is disingenuous at best, because he knows there are more white people on food stamps than any and every ethnic group.

It's a lot easier to energize these stupid, mayo loving, evangelical crackers on the concept of welfare being a black issue than an everybody issue.  He knows this and like I said disingenuous at best racist at worst and likely a combination of the two.

Frankly I've never understood why anyone cares who is on welfare or not.  I have money but wouldn't be considered rich, but Barack Obama being the food stamp president hasn't stopped me from owning houses, cars, taking vacations, having season tickets, etc.  You would think people would be more outraged about multi million dollar companies who legally don't have to pay taxes.

Because, while i agree with you on Newt's motives I think it was dumb of you to point out that more whites are on foodstamps than blacks.  Just pointing out the racial undertones of what he said gets the point across well enough.  Using those numbers actually detracts from the argument because they are flawed.  If a higher percentage of whites were on foodstamps than minorities then I would have no problem with you using them to prove your point.  Actually, had that been the case it would have driven it home right now.



Nic!  It is quite clear that you aren't getting the point.  Again I fully understand that there are a disproportionate amount of blacks on welfare, that isn't breaking news.  eff man I'm black, I'm perfectly aware with the social ills facing blacks.  What next, are you going to try to convince me that there are a lot of blacks in jail?  Do black males have short life expectancy?  Help me out.

I'm going to try this one more time for you and that moron the KHAN.  The reason why it is relevant that there are more whites on welfare is that in the context of Gingrich's comments he was discussing the financial impact of this country of people receiving welfare.  If you are concerned about the fiscal aspect of welfare and insist on focusing on groups of people and not all people I would think your focus should be the majority group.  If he was talking about the social impact of welfare then yes, the group with the larger percentage of recipients within that group should be the focus of the talking point.

I'll put this another way to help KHAN:

Assuming 62% of welfare recipients are white and 38% of recipients are everyone else and you want to minimize the impact of welfare on the American economy do you focus on the 62 or the 38?  The answer should be pretty simple.  I'd rather focus on the 100% but it is Newt who insists on separating groups, not me.

Now let's assume that 27% of all whites are receiving welfare and 56% of all blacks receive welfare.  If Newt's focus was on the social ills of welfare then it would be more appropriate to focus on the group of the larger percentage of its people on welfare.  Again even using the social ills argument I wouldn't put people into ethnic/racial groups because its 2012 blacks don't just live with blacks anymore, if welfare is a black problem because it leads to crime and blight its everyone's problem.

So Nic and KHAN; I, me, MIR has focused on the perceived fiscal impact on welfare because Newt has.  I have not yet once focused on the social impact of welfare so how many blacks on welfare isn't very relevant to this conversation.  I intentionally didn't discuss the social aspect of this because people would go full Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).  So stop lashing out at me because you guys didn't see the speech and aren't understanding the topic at hand.

That makes sense when you put it that way.  Now I feel like a jerk.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 25, 2012, 01:19:14 PM
Also, "delicately" was the wrong word. I think I was going for "brazenly".

And yeah. Huge lol at Gingrich winning a general election. He's totally rough ridin' over the republican party at this point. Deep down, he probably knows that but just doesn't give a crap. Which I also admire.

He's such an incredibly horrible person, yet so smart.  He's like a diabolical political genius from some low rent action comedy. 

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.sodahead.com%2Fpolls%2F002413273%2F4849531360_Gingrich_Laughing_350x233_xlarge.jpeg&hash=2f5694a5076dd609f086226f94dba844e2e7f962)

Yes. He is a caricature and it's almost like he's daring the country to elect him in order to prove a point about the country.

I bet that every single political pundit conservative or liberal are hoping like hell he gets the nomination because it would be amazing for business.  Mitt is insanely boring.  If you haven't watched the speech I linked earlier in the thread I'd recommend doing it.  The speech was great, I thought the best part is when he was talking about Obama, debates, and teleprompters.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 26, 2012, 09:44:18 PM
Woah, Newt got freaking destroyed in tonight's debate.  I can't recall a front runner getting his ass handed to him so badly.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: felix rex on January 26, 2012, 09:48:15 PM
Woah, Newt got freaking destroyed in tonight's debate.  I can't recall a front runner getting his ass handed to him so badly.

Well. Stick a fork in him. The voters have been looking for even just one single reason not to vote for him.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 26, 2012, 10:05:57 PM
Nic!  It is quite clear that you aren't getting the point.  Again I fully understand that there are a disproportionate amount of blacks on welfare, that isn't breaking news.  eff man I'm black, I'm perfectly aware with the social ills facing blacks.  What next, are you going to try to convince me that there are a lot of blacks in jail?  Do black males have short life expectancy?  Help me out.

I'm going to try this one more time for you and that moron the KHAN.  The reason why it is relevant that there are more whites on welfare is that in the context of Gingrich's comments he was discussing the financial impact of this country of people receiving welfare.  If you are concerned about the fiscal aspect of welfare and insist on focusing on groups of people and not all people I would think your focus should be the majority group.  If he was talking about the social impact of welfare then yes, the group with the larger percentage of recipients within that group should be the focus of the talking point.

I'll put this another way to help KHAN:

Assuming 62% of welfare recipients are white and 38% of recipients are everyone else and you want to minimize the impact of welfare on the American economy do you focus on the 62 or the 38?  The answer should be pretty simple.  I'd rather focus on the 100% but it is Newt who insists on separating groups, not me.

Now let's assume that 27% of all whites are receiving welfare and 56% of all blacks receive welfare.  If Newt's focus was on the social ills of welfare then it would be more appropriate to focus on the group of the larger percentage of its people on welfare.  Again even using the social ills argument I wouldn't put people into ethnic/racial groups because its 2012 blacks don't just live with blacks anymore, if welfare is a black problem because it leads to crime and blight its everyone's problem.

So Nic and KHAN; I, me, MIR has focused on the perceived fiscal impact on welfare because Newt has.  I have not yet once focused on the social impact of welfare so how many blacks on welfare isn't very relevant to this conversation.  I intentionally didn't discuss the social aspect of this because people would go full Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).  So stop lashing out at me because you guys didn't see the speech and aren't understanding the topic at hand.

Spending your entire life trying to find racism in every comment is an enormous waste of time.  It's desperate, pathetic and, in your case, self deprecating.  Stop dragging yourself down to "their" level, rise above it.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 26, 2012, 10:12:52 PM
Very timely, and in FSD true fashion you fanned on the point.  Also there is a Mitt Romney Spanish language ad in Florida accusing Newt of being a racist.  Not a super PAC ad either, a Romney ad.

So about that debate tonight.  Don't think Newt will be giving any victory speeches next Tuesday where he will say anything that could be construed as dog whistle racism by me or Mitt Romney.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 26, 2012, 10:18:04 PM
Very timely, and in FSD true fashion you fanned on the point.  Also there is a Mitt Romney Spanish language ad in Florida accusing Newt of being a racist.  Not a super PAC ad either, a Romney ad.

So about that debate tonight.  Don't think Newt will be giving any victory speeches next Tuesday where he will say anything that could be construed as dog whistle racism by me or Mitt Romney.

Well if Mitt agrees, I guess you're vindicated.  Good luck in you next witch hunt Sen. MirCarthey.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: sys on January 26, 2012, 10:21:21 PM
Very timely, and in FSD true fashion you fanned on the point.  Also there is a Mitt Romney Spanish language ad in Florida accusing Newt of being a racist.  Not a super PAC ad either, a Romney ad.

i've been to that town where romney´s father is from.  weird place, but cool (colonia juarez, nuevo casas grandes is normal).
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 26, 2012, 10:33:41 PM
Let's play a game, its called who said it.

Quote
We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the common language of the country and so they learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in a ghetto

Any guesses?
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: hemmy on January 26, 2012, 10:43:43 PM
MiR gets really but hurt about this crap.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 26, 2012, 10:49:01 PM
Let's play a game, its called who said it.

Quote
We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the common language of the country and so they learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in a ghetto

Any guesses?


Don't know who said it, but it could be true for any immigrant in any country in which they can't effectively communicate.  If I were to move to Russia and not learn the language, I would be stuck doing manual labor living in a ghetto.

Anyway, I m going to guess, since they said English, Cesar Chavez.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: jtksu on January 26, 2012, 11:15:13 PM
Seems like learning the only national language of the country you have relocated to would be beneficial. :dunno:
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: sys on January 26, 2012, 11:28:29 PM
Don't know who said it, but it could be true for any immigrant in any country in which they can't effectively communicate.  If I were to move to Russia and not learn the language, I would be stuck doing manual labor living in a ghetto.

romney's great grandfather moved to mexico, didn't learn spanish and his great grandchild is a multimillionaire.

Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 26, 2012, 11:35:08 PM
Seems like learning the only national language of the country you have relocated to would be beneficial. :dunno:

1. If you're referring to the United States, "the only national language" is so far beyond accurate its laughable.  The federal government has put out official documents is several languages for decades.

2. The point of the guess who said it game wasn't for this to devolve into a "national language" debate.  It's all about who said Spanish is a language of the ghetto and English isn't.  But I'm sure you knew that.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: jtksu on January 26, 2012, 11:37:52 PM
Just sayin that, if I moved to a non-English speaking country, I would either learn the langage beforehand or ASAP after arriving.  You can't honestly think that it is easier to force a country to learn your language than learn theirs, right?
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 26, 2012, 11:38:14 PM
MiR gets really but hurt about this crap.

You misspelled butt, but not crap.  I wish I could say I was shocked, but this is easily explained by 5 letters, hemmy.

Honest question, how many times were you held back in school?
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 26, 2012, 11:39:33 PM
Don't know who said it, but it could be true for any immigrant in any country in which they can't effectively communicate.  If I were to move to Russia and not learn the language, I would be stuck doing manual labor living in a ghetto.

romney's great grandfather moved to mexico, didn't learn spanish and his great grandchild is a multimillionaire.



And they all moved back to the US when his father was 5.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: sys on January 26, 2012, 11:46:46 PM
And they all moved back to the US when his father was 5.

yeah, his grandfather grew up there and lived there most of his adult life.  never learned spanish.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 26, 2012, 11:49:38 PM
Just sayin that, if I moved to a non-English speaking country, I would either learn the langage beforehand or ASAP after arriving.  You can't honestly think that it is easier to force a country to learn your language than learn theirs, right?

Okay?  Completely irrelevant to this particular conversation, but if you insist on having it, fine.  I'm not sure what you mean by forcing a country to learn your language. The Newt quote refers to English immersion as opposed bilingual education for Spanish speakers.  Not sure where forcing language comes into play.  Also there are immigrants in this country who are perfectly happy speaking their native tongue, it is nosy assholes who insist they speak English although Mexicans speaking Spanish, Chinese speaking Mandarin, or Mennonites speaking German have no affect on anyone else's life.  Mind your own damn business.

Also the Mennonite thing really bothers me.  There are is a substantial number of Mennonites in Kansas who don't speak English, why aren't they being harassed like Mexicans who share the same communities with these Mennonites?  
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 27, 2012, 12:12:50 AM
And they all moved back to the US when his father was 5.

yeah, his grandfather grew up there and lived there most of his adult life.  never learned spanish.

Maybe he wasn't particularly bright?  :dunno:  His son and grandson did pretty well.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: jtksu on January 27, 2012, 12:22:20 AM
Wonder how many countries have bilingual courses in public schools.  Not like "learn your native language and another" but like "learn your native language and the language of the country you are currently living in."  I imagine it probably happens everywhere.  I mean, no way the US is actually bending over backwards to accomodate immigrants, right?  No way that's happening, cause MIR says we're all a bunch of racists who don't care about anyone except white people.  Right?
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: MakeItRain on January 27, 2012, 12:43:50 AM
You are not worldly or smart enough to get any more of my time.  Please don't further hijack my thread with things you don't understand.  The quote isn't racist because he believes all Mexicans in America should speak English its racist because he equates someone's native tongue to the language of the ghetto.  Cue K-S-U to tell us that ghetto in that context means something positive and not at all  specific to minority groups.

The answer is Newt Gingrich, you suck at games.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: 420seriouscat69 on January 27, 2012, 12:46:35 AM
 :confused:  :clac:
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: jtksu on January 27, 2012, 01:06:23 AM
Yeah, I kinda figured that.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 27, 2012, 08:24:23 AM
Take a breath, MIR. You're getting really, really upset over a candidate who won't even get the nomination.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: LickNeckey on January 27, 2012, 10:09:47 AM
1) we have no national language

2) all testing for NCLB take place in English so I would consider that a immersion based system

3) the Spanish must be pleased to hear that their language is that of the "ghetto"

4) if someone is capable of making a living without learning english then why should they.  (i would be willing to bet that unemployment rates among hispanic americans is far lower than their linguisticly superior counterpoints)

5) "Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she

With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

BUT ONLY IF THEY LEAR ENGLISH!!!!!! :chainsaw: :curse: :chainsaw: :curse: :chainsaw: :curse:
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 27, 2012, 11:19:35 AM
Assimilation is an important part of "the melting pot." Many European nations are having significant problems because large immigrant populations have refused to assimilate.

Also, "national language" is a somewhat ambiguous term. The government goes to great lengths to accommodate non-English speakers, but nearly all immigrants must demonstrate English proficiency to become U.S. Citizens, and the vast majority of Americans speak English. We should help immigrants to learn English, but we should not accept Spanish or any other language as an alternative to English in the United States.

Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: jtksu on January 27, 2012, 11:24:49 AM
I'm guessing that English is not Lickneckey's native language.  I mean, I really hope it isn't.  Can someone get that guy into an immersion program?
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 27, 2012, 12:22:56 PM


4) if someone is capable of making a living without learning english then why should they.



Translation:   If we keep them uneducated and supplied with food stamps and other subsidies, we can keep them voting Democrat.  If they learn the language and are able to educate themselves, they may become conservative.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: LickNeckey on January 27, 2012, 01:59:19 PM
why would you have to know english to receive an education?

why would they have to know english to be conservative?

 :opcat: :nono: :opcat: :nono: :opcat:
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 27, 2012, 02:12:07 PM
why would you have to know english to receive an education?

why would they have to know english to be conservative?

 :opcat: :nono: :opcat: :nono: :opcat:

For now, most schools in the US teach in the English language.

With more information comes wisdom.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 30, 2012, 09:42:52 AM
Let's play a game, its called who said it.

Quote
We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the common language of the country and so they learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in a ghetto

Any guesses?


Don't know who said it, but it could be true for any immigrant in any country in which they can't effectively communicate.  If I were to move to Russia and not learn the language, I would be stuck doing manual labor living in a ghetto.

Anyway, I m going to guess, since they said English, Cesar Chavez.

You would actually have a better chance at a good job in Russia speaking only English than somebody who can only speak Russian.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 30, 2012, 09:44:50 AM


4) if someone is capable of making a living without learning english then why should they.



Translation:   If we keep them uneducated and supplied with food stamps and other subsidies, we can keep them voting Democrat.  If they learn the language and are able to educate themselves, they may become conservative.

It's not like providing a translator for the children of immigrants at a school is going to keep them from learning English. It will keep them from falling behind on their coursework by 1-2 years while they learn the language, though.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 30, 2012, 11:26:02 AM


4) if someone is capable of making a living without learning english then why should they.



Translation:   If we keep them uneducated and supplied with food stamps and other subsidies, we can keep them voting Democrat.  If they learn the language and are able to educate themselves, they may become conservative.

It's not like providing a translator for the children of immigrants at a school is going to keep them from learning English. It will keep them from falling behind on their coursework by 1-2 years while they learn the language, though.

Translators? WTF.?
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on January 30, 2012, 07:20:45 PM


4) if someone is capable of making a living without learning english then why should they.



Translation:   If we keep them uneducated and supplied with food stamps and other subsidies, we can keep them voting Democrat.  If they learn the language and are able to educate themselves, they may become conservative.

It's not like providing a translator for the children of immigrants at a school is going to keep them from learning English. It will keep them from falling behind on their coursework by 1-2 years while they learn the language, though.

Translators? WTF.?

Oh yes,  Soon every kid will be assigned a para.  The cost of public education is skyrocketing and we have the same number of students as we did 10 years ago.  Every little crap who can't sit still is assigned a para, which the taxpayer subsidizes to the detriment of the rest.  It's idiotic, but it's also "fair".
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Kat Kid on January 30, 2012, 09:12:41 PM
Wonder how many countries have bilingual courses in public schools.  Not like "learn your native language and another" but like "learn your native language and the language of the country you are currently living in."  I imagine it probably happens everywhere.  I mean, no way the US is actually bending over backwards to accomodate immigrants, right?  No way that's happening, cause MIR says we're all a bunch of racists who don't care about anyone except white people.  Right?

Exactly.  The United States is the international leader in bilingual education.  Nailed it.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: felix rex on January 30, 2012, 09:57:14 PM
If there's one thing that really, and I mean REALLY, burns me, it's educating disadvantaged kids. There will always be another country to provide an exploitable work force, but where would we be without a clear and present "they"?
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: felix rex on January 30, 2012, 10:01:08 PM
I briefly thought of going with "clear and present stranger" there, but felt the corniness would be a distraction (not to mention a grammatical stretch that would give skinny a linguistic charlie horse). I also considered "clear and present L'Etranger," but felt it would give the referenced minority the wrong connotation and distract from the productivity of the thread. And also be mispronounced.
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: Rage Against the McKee on January 31, 2012, 12:40:25 AM


4) if someone is capable of making a living without learning english then why should they.



Translation:   If we keep them uneducated and supplied with food stamps and other subsidies, we can keep them voting Democrat.  If they learn the language and are able to educate themselves, they may become conservative.

It's not like providing a translator for the children of immigrants at a school is going to keep them from learning English. It will keep them from falling behind on their coursework by 1-2 years while they learn the language, though.

Translators? WTF.?

Oh yes,  Soon every kid will be assigned a para.  The cost of public education is skyrocketing and we have the same number of students as we did 10 years ago.  Every little crap who can't sit still is assigned a para, which the taxpayer subsidizes to the detriment of the rest.  It's idiotic, but it's also "fair".

Yes, this is exactly what is happening. :lol:
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: LickNeckey on January 31, 2012, 12:06:29 PM
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/01/30/414199/gingrich-refused-work-student/?mobile=nc

 :driving:
Title: Re: Can someone please tell Newt...
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on January 31, 2012, 02:29:13 PM
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/01/30/414199/gingrich-refused-work-student/?mobile=nc

 :driving:

I don't know, maybe you guys do, but was Newt on welfare, food stamps, or any other government assistance at the time?  :dunno: