published Sunday, April 3rd, 2011

The Family

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

86
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
blackwater48 said...

OUTRAGEOUS

Why is the wife not bare foot?

April 3, 2011 at 12:03 a.m.
SavartiTN said...

They DO budget like a family does...they over extend with credit.

April 3, 2011 at 12:19 a.m.
dude_abides said...

Dad's apparel by GE and Rolls Royce

April 3, 2011 at 12:26 a.m.
fairmon said...

No doubt Boehner knows not of what he speaks.

The government needs to do a better job of budgeting than most families do. Both are borrowing and paying far too much interest on debts.

The government should set the example for responsible spending for American families. In one generation they have evolved from the world's largest lender to the world's largest debtor which is the same as American families have done.

The government budgeting like American families would mean continuing to spoil the kids, never saying no and not teaching them the difference between wants and needs.

A government budgeting like most American families would be a government willing to borrow and risk bankruptcy to maintain their country club membership and life style.

Why would he want the government to budget like a family when most families demand more of their government than they are willing to pay for but are willing to insist someone else pay?

To suggest that government should budget like families that prospered due the sacrifices of prior generations and willing to take out loans in the names of their children, grand children and the yet unborn to maintain their life style is not intelligent leadership.

Why should government emulate the typical American family budgeting that views those disabled and unable that would but can't the same as the lazy and incompetent that could but won't?

April 3, 2011 at 6:15 a.m.
ITguy said...

The son will join the Army as soon as he is eighteen.

April 3, 2011 at 6:16 a.m.
fairmon said...

Why would it not be better for the government to be like a family that allowed their children to have anything they wanted and if one got it they all get it and all of them contribute to pay for whatever they all get as they receive it? Would that not assure they know the cost and teach them to set priorities. Some want to play with matches and blow things up. Others want to save or feed the world and others want to provide for the sick, lame and lazy. No problem as long as they all collectively pay for those things as they receive or do them.

Some children will dislike parents that show favor to the other kids and provide what the other kids want but deny them those things they desire in order to favor the others. This is the family budgeting process the government has always used and still is being suggested but has never worked. It is time to do something drastically different, quit bickering, grow up and be responsible.

Why is Boehner unwilling to increase taxes on everyone enough to balance the budget instead of denying people what they want and demand? Why does government insist they know what is best for everyone?

April 3, 2011 at 6:49 a.m.
limric said...

Clay’s cartoon perfectly illustrates the divide between the haves (“You’re my base”) and have nots. someone will soon post (more or less), class struggle is just jealousy or Democrats love to practice class envy. I challenge anyone on the premise that class struggle has been reduced or liberals practice class envy. On the contrary, I say that there is a well calculated effort to dismantle the power of the middle class. It’s going on all the time and in every major institution of society. One just has to know how to recognize it.

Where does this occur? It occurs wherever three things are at stake: the balance of power between capitalists and workers, the legitimacy of capitalism, and profit.

• Capitalists want laws that weaken and cheapen labor.

• Capitalists want tax codes that allow them to pay as little tax as possible

• Capitalists want public subsidies of the infrastructure on which their profitability depends.

It is in education. Unions are blamed for problems that are in fact consequences of misappropriation. In higher education. Business schools are exempted from criticism for being ideological and free-market economists are lauded as objective scientists.

In modern culture, when books, films, and songs vaunt the myth that economic inequality is a result of natural differences in talent and motivation. Or when the media celebrate militarism and violence.

In religion. When exploitation is justified as divinely ordained and rational thought are stunted by superstition, capitalism is then reinforced.

The important thing is identifying the ways that corporations try to manipulate and advance their interests at the expense of everyone else. This can be shown by the diversion at work because the current economic problems threaten to unite the middle class…who they have successfully divided to fight over crumbs.

Once one you grasp it, suddenly, unrelated actions start to make sense. Think about it. Why would capitalists bankroll candidates and politicians to destroy public sector unions? Why do they care so much about the public sector? They don't want to balance budgets, improve efficiency, or achieve any of the goals publicly touted by the new crop of governors. It’s because of the profit and power gained by destroying the last remaining organizations that fight for the interests of working people in the political sphere. Cutting social services is about ensuring that workers depend on low-wage jobs. The goal, as always, is a greater share of wealth for them and a smaller share for you. Clear away the rhetoric, and it becomes clear that the bottom line is the bottom line.

The middle class has been in a retreat for the last thirty years. The side that’s been losing has begun to fight back more aggressively. To understand what’s at stake in this and what a real victory might look like, we better start calling what’s happening to the middle class by its proper name. CLASS WARFARE.

April 3, 2011 at 6:56 a.m.
fairmon said...

Limric,

You may be crediting them with a higher level of intelligence than they deserve. The results you describe may occur just as they have throughout the history of all dynasties but due to the lack of intelligence instead of collective brilliance and scheming. The rapid accumulation of debt and the eventual consequences is not in the best interest of the middle class or any other class unless there is an advantage to increasing the debt that I am missing. It is not in the best interest of anyone that the government show favor to some businesses at the expense of other businesses and those citizens paying taxes. Both parties show favor and manipulate via programs and the tax system with neither doing so in the best interest of the country but to attract votes to retain power and satisfy their ego.

April 3, 2011 at 7:46 a.m.
sandyonsignal said...

This illustrates a lack of regard for women, children and animals. Most societies value families and want to take care of their wife and kids before themselves. Not in the GOP world, though, greed and flaunting of wealth while others are in need of the most basic, is perfectly fine. It is shameful to not value our children and future more than ourselves.

April 3, 2011 at 8:30 a.m.
rick1 said...

January 2011 State of the Union Obama said the following:

"Over the years, a parade of lobbyists has rigged the tax code to benefit particular companies and industries. "Those with accountants or lawyers to work the system can end up paying no taxes at all."

Also in January 2011 Obama appointed CEO Jeff Immelt of GE to head the Preident's Council on Jobs.

GE did not owe any taxes in 2010 after making $14.2 billion in worldwide profits including more then $5 billon from U.S. Operations.

Also an article 02/08/2010 in China Daily stated GE is viewing China not only as a manufacturing hub and sourcing center but also as a base for product innovation and research and development (R&D). Last year it spent $4.5 billion on product sourcing in China. Article also stated among the 13,000 people GE employs in China, 2,000 are focused on R&D and product innovation.

Immelt was also doing business up to 2005 with Iran so one has to question his loyalty to American ideas.

So where is Obama's concern about underhanded companies when he appointed Immelt?

It appears Obama supports these capitalists who want tax codes that allow them to pay as little tax as possible, and who ship jobs over seas.

Isn't this what the democracts accuse the republicnas of going?

April 3, 2011 at 8:41 a.m.
limric said...

Harp339,

Your point is well taken and your comments are intelligent and sensible. There is however a compelling argument for my conspiratorial views of a calculated effort to dismantle the power of the middle class. When one adds what I’ve highlighted above with my post on March 31, 2011 at 3:56 p.m from Clays ‘Right Turn’ cartoon, its hard not to wonder if something nefarious is afoot. Also, whenever someone questions the status quo or demands answers from those benefiting from such policies, the spin (BS if you will) is rarely questioned by the media or the populace as a whole.

We have a GOP that is attempting to ram through austerity policies they will not share in, a President that will not fight AT ALL and new state governors blatantly bought off by corporate power.

The latest evidence to my conspiracy theory (paranoia?); Obama and the Republicans are pressing for the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS-FTA). Even the U.S. International Trade Commission has admitted that it will cause significant job losses. Wasn’t there a time when the President and Republicans shouted that the number one economic priority is job creation? Kind of gives the phrase “contradictions of capitalism” a whole new meaning.

Boy I hope you’re right, but I fear you’re not.


Rick1,

Great points. Good post..

April 3, 2011 at 8:46 a.m.
delmar said...

I agree with you rick1, after I heard this news I thought- what the hell are they thinking, I hope they have a plan, because on the surface this looks like a capitulation move. It just keeps getting worse for us 95%ers.

You're right Limric, President Obama may turn out to be the best president the Republican's have ever had.

April 3, 2011 at 8:51 a.m.
woody said...

Happy Sunday everyone..and Harp, you seem to have 'hit the nail squarely on the head' on all of your posts this morning. The government should be "leading by example" but clearly think they are above such mundane ideas.

I've always thought there should be an old adage (with just a bit of tweaking) on all of the outer doors of congressional (maybe even state) offices. It should read, "Out of sight, out of mind..out of touch...."

Have a great day..Woody

April 3, 2011 at 8:55 a.m.
delmar said...

Limric said; "Wasn’t there a time when the President and Republicans shouted that the number one economic priority is job creation?"

Apparently they didn't really mean the American people.

April 3, 2011 at 9:03 a.m.
SeaMonkey said...

so this is the view an extreme liberal has of the american family???

and i suppose the government should step in because they're far more responsible with money?

sorry..but this is typcial crap...most families in this country...and i mean most..operate much more efficiently than the government.

sorry, but i've never missed a bill, only owe money on my house, use credit cards only when i need them, don't spend more than i take in and i put my family first.

and sandy, there're many example of households in debt because of a woman's overspending or lavish tastes....the femist whining sessions are getting old......and boring. "greed and flaunting of wealth while others are in need of the most basic".....like ge not having to pay taxes after making billions...which seems to be ok with obama, a democrat? or others flaunting their wealth while others are in need..like oprah who likes to buy multi-million dollar homes, or al gore , who has one standard for himself and one for everyone else? both democrats.......sorry, the democrat party has no standing to criticize anyone.......both parties have screwed this country...both.. both are to blame...

rick is correct...there is a massive double standard. there isn't much difference between the democrat party and the republican party on many levels.

where's the uproar by the media over obama and ge? the lib media bitched for a decade about bush and haliburton and bush and oil.....which was crap. now this...and virtually no response?

obama feels he can do whatever he wants and he liberal media will cover for him. obama is the ultimate corrupt and hyporcritical politician ......

April 3, 2011 at 9:28 a.m.
delmar said...

SeaMonkey said... "the lib media bitched for a decade about bush and haliburton and bush and oil.....which was crap"

No,, it wasn't.

SeaMonkey said... "obama is the ultimate corrupt and hyporcritical politician ......"

No,, he's not, Bush holds that distinction.

April 3, 2011 at 9:38 a.m.
SeaMonkey said...

christopher dodd, barney frank, nancy pelosi...all democrats, sandy.....

the head of your party, sandy, couldn't care less about those that are in need...he displays that all the time.

and you lbs on here blast the tea party people.

on one hand you bitch and moan about the hypocracy of both parties, on the other you ridicule people who want to elect people who are accountable to the people.

April 3, 2011 at 9:39 a.m.
SeaSmokie59er said...

If the wife and kids would just be patient, trickle-down is coming soon.

April 3, 2011 at 9:48 a.m.
stanleyyelnats said...

SeaMonkey projecting his feelings again.

Projection:

Psychological projection or projection bias is a psychological defense mechanism where a person unconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, such as to other people. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting the belief that others have those feelings.1

Somehow, I don't think this is the family that Mr. Boehner has in mind when he makes his statement. Mr. Boehner has visions of Wealthy Republican families doing the budget. New Mercedes, big house with swimming pool, big screen TV, etc...etc...etc

America is BROKE because W Bush ran America like a CORPORATION.

A public corporation may leverage its equity by borrowing money. The more it borrows and borrows and borrows.....

April 3, 2011 at 10:20 a.m.
dude_abides said...

G.E. engine vote a defeat for Boehner

From NBC’s Michael Isikoff

The surprise House vote today to kill $450 million to build a alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter was a big victory for an unlikely alliance that included the Obama administration and Tea Party Republicans determined to slash spending across the board, including the military budget.

But it was also a setback for House GOP leaders, including Speaker John Boehner, who has fought hard to save the project over the years.

Monkeyman... what does this mean? I'm not sure I grasp what this news item tells us about Obama, GE, and Boehner. Is this report a left wing media conspiracy? A lie?

April 3, 2011 at 10:43 a.m.
dude_abides said...

In effect, they contended, the GE alternative engine was simply a thinly disguised earmark and a classic example of pork-barrel spending. GE (and Rolls Royce) are partners in the project to develop the alternate or back up engine to the primary one being built by Pratt & Whitney in Connecticut.

One of the biggest backers of the project: House Speaker John Boehner, whose district is just outside the main GE plant where the alternate engine is being built. (Boehner even cut a YouTube video last year extolling the virtues of the project. He reiterated his support for the GE engine just this week, but told reporters he would let the House “work its will” by having an up or down vote.

April 3, 2011 at 10:48 a.m.
fairmon said...

When you look into Obama's eyes and see his winning smile as he reads to you from the teleprompter that wetness you feel on your left foot is not rain.

When Boehner talks about his American dream and doing the peoples work that wetness on your right foot is not from his flowing tears.

I hate someone urinating on my leg and even on a sunny day trying to convince me it is rain getting my pants leg wet.

One party insist we have a spending problem without acknowledging a revenue problem, a small spending reduction will take care of a huge revenue shortage? The other party insist we can borrow ourselves out of debt and into prosperity without a sacrifice from the majority while they have their hand in our pocket.

Those listening select the one that best describes their fantasy then rally to support them and in lemming fashion repeat what they say until they truly believe it.

April 3, 2011 at 11:10 a.m.
dude_abides said...

Barrack Obama and his communist (democrat) friends are bankrupting this nation! -L4F

Except for this one instance? Can't you just see Boehner's porkadile tears? The little dimples in his chinny chin chin? His moist pink snout sniffing for comfort truffles? His sparsely tufted ears twitching independently? Gee....no GE.

April 3, 2011 at 11:17 a.m.
potcat said...

Lib4freedom said...goverment should budget like a responsible family.Does the cartoon look like a responsiable family? Looks to me like Big Daddy has a promblem with sharing. Mr. Big of course couldn't be that way without a collective group of people sacrificing "Mamma,Son,Daughter." Poor Fido looks like he could do with some table scraps. oops looks like that is what BIG Daddy is throwing his MINONS.

April 3, 2011 at 11:25 a.m.
fairmon said...

Sandyonsignal said:

This illustrates a lack of regard for women, children and animals. Most societies value families and want to take care of their wife and kids before themselves.


That sounds sexist to care for only women and children and animals with no mention of the male member of the family. However you are right we should care for families. I would not include animal care with my tax dollars unless they are for food to feed families. If I want an animal then it would be at my cost without help with that cost.

Which society do you propose we emulate? Any of those that are attracting our American businesses so their families can provide for themselves? China? Canada? Sweden? India? Japan? Taiwan? Vietnam? Korea? Iceland? Brazil? Argentina? Mexico? Which has the family "best practices" behavior regarding caring for families that we need to copy? You may want to visit and get first hand information before selecting, I can understand that. I don't trust the media and politicians to enlighten me in such matters either.

April 3, 2011 at 11:33 a.m.
fairmon said...

Does this 'toon convey that the government is not the ultimate American family or at least a family of Americans. Does this 'toon suggest the government is merely a distant observer dependent on that family to sustain itself and an entity willing to suck the life blood from that American family if needed to assure it has full control of the entire family of Americans? Would the other side of this 'toon show a beaten, bloody pauper father in the company of a fat wife holding a pampered pet and fat, cool lazy kids?

April 3, 2011 at 11:47 a.m.
rick1 said...

I would suggest everyone read this article, and see how George Soros will benefit from Obama's push to help New Guinea become an energy power. http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/s_730320.html

April 3, 2011 at 11:58 a.m.
sandyonsignal said...

Harp 33, how about if we emulate this: For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

Emulate Matthew 25.

I remember back during the Bush years, it was Christmas time and Congress passed a whole bunch of cuts to hurt poor children from getting free breakfast in school, medicaid for poor and disabled, and other programs to help the "least of these". Two days later, Congress passed the Bush tax cuts for millionaires funded on the backs of the poor and downtrodden. Where was the Tea Party outrage? Where were the evangelicals? All we heard from that side was crickets chirping.

April 3, 2011 at 1:31 p.m.
hambone said...

Well said sandy.

And they are doing the same this year!

April 3, 2011 at 2:35 p.m.
ITguy said...

Sandy, I'm sure that Matthew got that wrong. That just doesn't sound like something a Libertarian would say.

April 3, 2011 at 3:43 p.m.
SeaMonkey said...

wrong delmar....obama takes the cake..by far...he's thoroughly corrupt through and through..he's the product of a corrupt system in chicago.....this thing with ge is the perfect example....and the perfect example of how he t hinks he can get away with everything..just like chicago democrat politicians do.....obama is a liar. plain and simple....

and, yes.....the whole halliburton thing was bull****....completely..but t his ge thing..is 100% real. where's the evidence that bush and cheney have profited from iraq oil? huh???? where...a complete lie.

the mantra of bush/cheney being evil has proven to be garbage in light of the last two years...

sorry...bush may have been a screw up regarding spending in his second term..he spent like a democrat..but bush was real...obama is a complete phony jerk.

April 3, 2011 at 5:04 p.m.
rolando said...

Big difference between my voluntary tithing and an overfed government taking my money by force of arms and giving a small part of it to those I don't even know. [Keeping the rest, of course, for "other things".]

Christ didn't require an involuntary giving up of hard-earned alms.

Essentially everything Christ taught about helping others involved voluntary contributions of time or money, not involuntary servitude. So if someone chooses to help others, good on him/her. Just don't expect everyone to contribute to those same "others"...they have their own charities to support. And that's the way Jesus taught it to be through word and parable.

April 3, 2011 at 5:10 p.m.
SeaMonkey said...

whether it's ge, his appointment of czars or his desire to punish the citizenry for not purchasing a commidity obama is the perfect example of an authoritarian.

his siding with illegal aliens over citizens is disgusting.

he doen't like the constitution...he proves it over and over again...whether it's libya, the health mandate or his disrespect for states and the rights of their citizens.

April 3, 2011 at 5:12 p.m.
rolando said...

There are essentially two companies in competition for each government contract let for everything the government orders...and that's the way Procurement wants it.

Whether it is GE vs Pratt and Whitney, Lockheed vs Northrup, Boeing vs Douglas, Raytheon vs its competitor, the government wants two competitive bids...and it will and does support all those companies by generally alternating between which of the two companies wins the contract. That keeps the competitors alive. It sometimes goes so far as to designate one as prime contractor and the other as a mandatory sub, reversing the order the next contract. Each of those companies listed above is extremely capable of producing leading-edge technology -- and yes, there have been mergers over the years but "by whatever name..." -- and the choice of which product to buy is liken to the flip of a coin...both products work and work well.

[Lockheed was not the only company to submit a stealth fighter for trials.]

GE's efforts to force a new contract award "out of cycle", if you will, screws up the whole system and exposes favoritism in the highest levels of government -- an unhealthy condition in today's economy.

No one is so naive out there as to believe an "alternative" is necessary, I hope. Unless the desire is to see P&W, et al go under...

April 3, 2011 at 5:32 p.m.
sandyonsignal said...

Rolando, I'm thinking I have a different Bible than you. Mine contains all kinds of references to serving the poor and woe to those who don't. Luke, Corinthians, all come to mind right now. There are so many references, I will be busy for the next two days with it.

April 3, 2011 at 5:32 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Yeah, I think he said "helpeth the poor, if thou dost feeleth like it. My father shall paveth the roads and repaireth the bridges."

Jesus told a parable about a rich man who lived in an elegant home. Outside his gates lived a beggar named Lazarus. (Notice Jesus names the poor man, but doesn’t bother to name the rich man, even though the story is mostly about the rich man.) The wealthy man doesn’t do anything to serve or help the beggar, who was in need of food and medical care. When both men die, it is the poor man who receives the reward, and the rich man suffers eternal punishment, which he, naturally, finds upsetting. When he asks that Lazarus be sent in to serve him and help him feel better, Abraham says, “Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.” LOL... So much for amateur theologian hour.

April 3, 2011 at 5:38 p.m.
rolando said...

Was force of arms mentioned, sandyo'sig?

I will take a look myself. Mind you, I was speaking about Jesus' teachings through his words and parables, not Paul's, et al. Paul had his own problems.

April 3, 2011 at 5:42 p.m.
rolando said...

Once dead, dude, judgment comes. Not before. It is called "free will" not "thou shalt...or else". Obeying government edict under pain of prison in this life is not remotely connected with any "charity" parable Jesus spoke nor to anything he taught. He definitely favored helping your neighbors in need, but said nothing of someone in some other country of whom you know nothing insofar as his need is concerned. He did not even require that of "the wealthy man" -- obviously, Lazarus was known to him.

And paving roads and building bridges has little to nothing to do with helping your needy neighbors.

April 3, 2011 at 5:55 p.m.
sandyonsignal said...

There you go cherry picking the Bible, Rolando.

April 3, 2011 at 6:02 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Please don't ask me to believe that God's cool with letting the poor suffer in the shadow of wealth. Surely God despises equivocation and qualification when it comes to taking care of the needy. Render unto Caesar, etc. Are you saying that if a wealthy man wears blinders, and no poor are known to him, he gets a pass? Are you saying a more gregarious wealthy man who knows many needy people should, in God's plan, give more of his wealth?

The common good should include our needy, roads, defense...

April 3, 2011 at 6:15 p.m.
rolando said...

"Cherry-picking" sandyo'? We were discussing Jesus' words and teachings about charity and not those of one who came after Him... straight from His lips, as it were. That's cherry picking? That's just about the entire NT...the meat of it, anyway.

April 3, 2011 at 8:17 p.m.
rolando said...

I asked nothing of the sort, dude.

Over and over Jesus said for each of us to care for our needy neighbors. Not the whole world. Why should our governmentt take our money under threat of arms and [after taking their share] ship it off to enrich foreign warlords? We cannot and should not feed and care for the whole world. "The poor you will always have with you"

Building and repairing roads and bridges and the common defense are the constitutionally imposed duty of our government. Taking care of the needy is not one of them.

April 3, 2011 at 8:27 p.m.
Echo said...

Hey Scribbles - Before the woman married to the Kenyan in the White House was riding on the American taxpayers coattails, she was just the wife of a Democrat US Senator that won his first election by suing everybody else off the ballot, she earned $1.3 million per year on the board of a Chicago company. She has nothing in her background to justify that salary. With that kind of influence peddling from Obama and his pals at GE, is it any wonder that not enough corporate taxes are paid to meet a balanced budget?

April 3, 2011 at 9:17 p.m.
dude_abides said...

So we don't mind pitching in on Oregon's roads, but the poor in Chattanooga have to get help from the kindness of our fickle hearts. Nah. Isn't it strange that we're discussing Jesus' parables on charity, but we need not feel a duty to help the poor unless he demands it under force of arms. Then, the poor are out of luck constitutionally as well. Seems as though Jesus doesn't really want the poor fed, does he? I mean surely he would have popped a parable in, or planted a seed in the minds of the framers regarding the poor, if he had compassion for the unfortunate. Is that where you see the Son of God coming in on this subject? Nobody wants to give anything to undeserving slobs, but come on.

April 3, 2011 at 9:29 p.m.
dude_abides said...

The Associated Press is reporting that President Barack Obama has won a showdown vote in the GOP-controlled House to kill a costly alternative engine for the Pentagon's next-generation fighter jet. A flood of Republican freshmen elected on a platform to cut the budget helped President Obama win the costly battle. Many taxpayer watchdog groups weighed in against the $3 billion engine program.

The move was a loss for House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio, whose state reaped thousands of jobs from the engine, built by General Electric Co. and Rolls-Royce. Ouch. Maybe bipartisanship isn't a bad thing after all. Time will tell.

April 3, 2011 at 9:35 p.m.
fairmon said...

Sandyonsignal,

I did attend a church supported college and it was a good school, I learned a lot and I do consider myself a christian. A good sermon you posted, pass the offering plate. If you read my post you will see where I said we must support those unable to provide for themselves. I will compare my percent of income charitable giving to anyone. I think we could and should all do more but do it directly not from some inefficient incompetent government entity that has to borrow money to buy votes.

In no scripture you posted or that I have read has there ever been a suggestion to encourage the government to confiscate from some to give to others. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars doesn't mention so he can fund a welfare state. The government is the most inefficient process on earth to handle money for charity. It is the christian thing to do but why should Christians be able to dictate to the non Christians that whey will also contribute to welfare whether they agree or not? I can get real upset when I see all the monstrous elaborate cathedral building by the churches, their gymnasiums and recreation centers for members, their suppers for members, Home comings and other events where they gorge on food they prepare for each other, their fine parsonages, the rental property they own and profit from tax free to support church activities, their fine pastor driving the finest of cars and wearing Armani suits. Does your church read the verse to mean as you do these things for each other you have done them unto me as those I have observed do? How many holier than thou members volunteer to work or serve at the community kitchen regularly? How many volunteer to work at the food bank or drive a truck for the food bank or God forbid maybe even contribute to them? How many assist meals on wheels delivering meals to the shut in? How many assist habitat for humanity? Some very few do these things. Don't quote scripture to me with all the hypocrites filling the churches locally and across this country that insist the government do what they as Christians consider the christian thing to do. They insist the government do the lord's work while they drive fine cars and socialize among themselves never visiting a homeless shelter or any other place where they may get soiled. Why do preachers only visit members that are ill and not the homeless or those with no family? When they change churches why does the lord always call them to a bigger church that pays more? Why are these people willing to be so benevolent with tax money instead of building and supporting housing projects of their own? instead they insist the government confiscate the money and skim about half of it off to administer the funding. Church members could administer their own program for free? The opportunites are many for good christians to do good work instead of the government.

April 3, 2011 at 9:44 p.m.
dude_abides said...

harp, that is exactly why the "faith based initiatives" were such a joke. Putting my kids through a church preschool daycare showed me which way was up, so to speak. The poor don't stand a chance versus a new gym.

April 3, 2011 at 9:57 p.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Was that his own family Mr Bennett drew?

Limric wrote, "Unions are blamed for problems that are in fact consequences of misappropriation." Likely sometimes, but if union rules say you have to lay off the newest teachers instead of the worst teachers, aren't unions to blame for that? I've read that getting rid of the worst teachers is one of the best things a school can do--if it can do it. Not that insisting on MY share of the pie rather than working out how to enlarge the pie so we can all have larger shares is a vice unique to unions.

Sandyonsignal, if you think the I.R.S. takes good care of the poor, how much have you sent in over and above what they insist upon?

I'm not impressed with the generosity of those who meddle in my pockets, but of those who choose to empty their own. Jesus gave his own life. That's generous. Follow Him. Our Vice President, with several hundred thousand a year, gives away maybe twice as much as I give on thirty thousand or so. That's not so generous.

The Bible says give the poor an opportunity to scratch out a living: let them pick up fallen wheat after the harvesters have harvested a field. (Read the little Book of Ruth for an example.) But federal law requires a minimum wage: if you're not worth $7.15 an hour, or whatever, be a tax-fed beggar. Instead, let companies pay, say, $2/hr, to pick cigarette butts off the parking lot; work out urban alternatives to gleaning in fields. (Pastor George Grant got the church he served doing this kind of thing, and wrote a book, BRINGING IN THE SHEAVES, about this kind of ministry.) Help the poor work their way up from the bottom--work--don't just write them checks.

April 3, 2011 at 10:15 p.m.

Studies have shown that bad charity (state-delivered) drives out good charity (privately-delivered). Believe it or not, this is what works:

http://www.samaritanguide.com/resources/articles/sevenprinciples/

http://www.fastennetwork.org/Uploads/9FD7FF6B-7B90-4488-8309-6BC260AD97F7.pdf


And now … We interrupt today's confusion about Jesus’ instructions on giving to God and giving to Caesar with a word from Caesar on how he saw Jesus’ disciples putting into practice Jesus’ words:

WWWTW: Emperor Julian, is your microphone working?

4th century Roman Emperor Julian: Yes. As I was just conveying to my fellow Romans:

"Atheism [what Romans called Christianity because they denied the Roman gods] has been specifically advanced through the loving treatment rendered to strangers and through their care for the burial of the dead. It is a scandal that there is not a single Jew who is a beggar and that the godless Galileans care not only for their own poor but ours as well."


Coins belonging Caesar are for building roads. Coins belonging to God are for helping the poor.

April 3, 2011 at 10:52 p.m.
dude_abides said...

So any atheists that are thinking of helping the poor should just get another boat, and all the devout can just decide what the price of admission to Heaven is! It's eternity boys, better give a ton. Wow, Christians parsing Jesus' words to keep their money in their pocket would be like the worst blasphemy imaginable. Not accusing anybody here, just sayin'.

April 3, 2011 at 11:31 p.m.

Not exactly. No. Yes. Yes. OK.

April 3, 2011 at 11:44 p.m.
fairmon said...

In addition, since I have violated my practice of not commenting on religious matters. Those pious perch sitting Christians that will align themselves with any impersonal non feeling political party are, in my opinion, making a pact with or selling their soul to the devil.

Government welfare and charities are bad charities that root out good charities. They employ people which requires a significant portion of the funding. they require those in need to go through a "complete this form and apply, we will let you know" process that is impersonal, demeaning and void of caring or kindness. Apply, qualify, no wonder it becomes viewed as a right and a way of living instead of an assisting hand to help those in need to provide for their self. Christians forget the example of feeding a man a fish to satisfy his hunger one day versus teaching him to fish to satisfy his hunger for life and they ignore the fact that the teachers were Christians not a government training program.

I am confident many don't agree with me and if I upset or offended anyone I do apologize but some things just hit my hot button. I am not sure if the 'toon was alluding to the welfare issue or to the issue of not taxing businesses and the wealthy more and the rest of us less.

April 4, 2011 at 12:39 a.m.
JohnnyRingo said...

Bravo Clay. I couldn't think of a better way to describe these Bizzarro Robin Hoods' goal if I tried all year.

That's a keeper.

April 4, 2011 at 3:01 a.m.
delmar said...

SeaMonkey said... "wrong delmar....obama takes the cake..by far...he's thoroughly corrupt through and through..he's the product of a corrupt system in chicago.....this thing with ge is the perfect example....and the perfect example of how he t hinks he can get away with everything..just like chicago democrat politicians do.....obama is a liar. plain and simple...."

Sorry, you're still wrong and the only thing plain and simple is Bush and his cronies. They damn near drove this country off a cliff.

"and, yes.....the whole halliburton thing was bull****....completely..but t his ge thing..is 100% real. where's the evidence that bush and cheney have profited from iraq oil? huh???? where...a complete lie."

Nope sorry,,, still wrong. Bush/Cheney worst administration in history,, history.

"the mantra of bush/cheney being evil has proven to be garbage in light of the last two years..."

Wrong It has only become clearer.

"sorry...bush may have been a screw up regarding spending in his second term..he spent like a democrat..but bush was real...obama is a complete phony jerk"

I will agree with one thing here. Bush was real alright, a real mistake for a President.

April 4, 2011 at 7:47 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I cannot believe there are people actually supporting this cartoon! It takes a special level of intellectual vapidity to think this picture depicts in any way what the American family looks like or to defend irresponsible government financial behavior based on the notion that applying rules of conduct typical in the American family would somehow have results as shown in this trash pile being offered as a cartoon.

clay bennett and those that think like him are a disease. The sooner it runs its course the better it will be for everyone.

How about the family of “King” obama standing in formal wear surrounded by a rag clad crowd of citizens with their unwashed hands stretched out for handouts. This is the America obama wants, dependent and enslaved.

April 4, 2011 at 9:01 a.m.

BigRidgePatriot, the sheeple will cheer for anything coming from Bennett and the Whitehouse talking points. Baa, baa, baaa.

But Claydo has, once again, targeted a middle-aged white male. Hmm.

April 4, 2011 at 10:20 a.m.
SavartiTN said...

BRP, don't you get it...we (Americans) are all part of a big family but only a small part of the "family" is well off. And oblivious to the needs of the rest of the family. Boehner is and will remain an idiot.

April 4, 2011 at 10:22 a.m.
mtngrl said...

BRP, Savarti is right. I do not see the cartoon the way you and some others here are interpreting that family.

Notice the quote above the family is Boehner's own words. If the family's budget was really run the way he wants the government budget to be run, this is what that family would look like. The toon is a depiction of Boehner's views - not the American family.

April 4, 2011 at 11:05 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Give me a break! The Boehner quote was referencing a typical family unit, not the socialist's notion that the nation is one big happy family and can function as such.

How many families (besides clay's) do you know where the patriarch lavishes himself with all the luxuries and neglects the rest of the family? You have to have a twisted view of the family to see any relevance here.

I am still waiting for Boehner to do something worth getting excited about but he is no idiot. obama and reid, on the otherhand, are either idiots or they know what they are doing and as such are downright evil.

April 4, 2011 at 11:11 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Again, you have to be twisted to appreciate bennett’s distortion of Boehner’s quote!

I see no point in trying to argue the obvious with idiots.

April 4, 2011 at 11:19 a.m.
delmar said...

Spot on SavartiTN. Apparently the merely obvious is too hard to mentally digest for some. For some, they can barely absorb the incredibly obvious.

April 4, 2011 at 11:49 a.m.

SavartiTN said...

They DO budget like a family does...they over extend with credit.

__

That was a much better observation than your federal family (global village?) one.


As for the cartoon, the only explanation is a tight deadline. (Editor: JUST GET SOMETHING ON PAPER, BENNETT! SOMETHING ABOUT REPUBLICANS HATING THE POOR. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO MAKE SENSE! THOSE IDIOTS WILL COMMENT ON JUST ABOUT ANYTHING.)

April 4, 2011 at 11:57 a.m.
acerigger said...

Anyone who thinks that the repubs are not out to destroy the safety-net for Americans, to cut wages and benefits for workers is the idiot. People wake up! Repubs, WHERE ARE THE JOBS?

April 4, 2011 at 12:13 p.m.
canarysong said...

I have a deadline to meet and don't really have time to be writing at all, but I have to share this with you...

An estimated 1000(!) rallies, teach-ins, and candlelight vigils are being held TODAY across the country to protest the Republican war against unions, teachers, and the entire middle class. Eleven of them are within 1 1/2 hour of my home, even though I live on the edge of nowhere.

The political tide has turned. Americans are suddenly recognizing the far-right tea party agenda for what it is, and they are rejecting it across the board. The recent attacks on the American middle class have awakened a sleeping giant. Finally progressives, and even centrist Republicans, are starting to galvanize around a co-ordinated effort to push back against the radical assaults of the far right. We will NOT stand by as more and more people in this country sink into poverty while big oil companies and Wall Street continue to reap record-setting profits. Protesting citizens are demanding that our government work to fix national and state budget problems by taxing big corporations and billionaires, and ending our endless wars.

"We don’t need to waste our time appealing to the Democratic Party or writing letters to the editor. We don’t need more diatribes on the Internet. We need to physically get into the public square and create a mass movement." 

"That physical action of leaving the computer at home and occupying the bank, street, or Capitol is beginning to happen." 

Teabaggers who have been overeaching the authority of the offices to which they were so recently elected are now finding themselves the target of massive recall campaigns. Soon many will likely be out on the street looking for new jobs (would you like fries with that, sir?).

http://www.thenation.com/blog/159664/resistance-has-begun

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/04/winant_labor_new_haven

http://blog.aflcio.org/2011/04/04/why-martin-luther-king-jr-would-support-the-public-worker-protests/

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2011/04/koch_brothers.html

BTW, there were some really good posts early yesterday.... Limric, harp, sandyonsignal..... Great work!

April 4, 2011 at 12:59 p.m.
limric said...

Ah, What are you trying to say ECHO?

Schizophrenic Monthly rated your rant (on a scale of "Jimmy Carter has been running the government since 1963, when the Pope declared him Emperor of America" to "my pets are telling me to kill") at a record "angels are walking the streets of Manhattan, butchering the children of Cain" and gave you a lifetime achievement award.

April 4, 2011 at 1:10 p.m.
limric said...

Thanks for sharing Canarysong,

We need to remind ourselves and our elected officials that we can VOTE them out. We are too informed and too engaged (enraged) to be fooled by corporate misinformation, bogus campaigns, or distracted by mindless entertainment, no matter how much money is poured into it.
Our politicians (oxymoron?) keep allowing corporate lobbyists to write laws and exploit loop holes into our tax code because vampires are afraid that if they don't, multi-national corporations will use their billions to expose them out of office.

 LET US NOT FORGET:
  • I pay taxes - I deserve representation - I've paid those taxes all my life - I work hard -
    I didn't cause the recession - I didn't deregulate the big banks - I didn’t get a bailout - Why aren't I too-big-to-fail? - Socialism for the rich has failed us - Trickle down has failed us - Where are the jobs? - Invest in me - Invest in America - Invest in our future - Cancel the Corporate Welfare reality TV show.

Ordinary Americans do not have channels devoted to our interests as corporate America does, but if we are creative, we can rival the corporate spin machine and democratization of the media may still be possible. We can still have an impact on policy making by making enough noise, and letting politicians know that we will vote in our nation's and our family's best interest, no matter how much corporations try to misinform us.

The revolution will be televised

April 4, 2011 at 1:17 p.m.
canarysong said...

And on the flip side......

Thursday, March 31, 2011

Capitol Hill rally expecting 'thousands of Tea Party activists' had crowd of around 100

"Yep. All the big names in teabagging were combining forces to show members of Congress how powerful they are. Thousands were expected. It was going to be HUGE."

Oops!

"It was a big bust. Pence and Bachmann were there. But, they weren't joined by "thousands of Tea Party activists." Not even close."

"Over at DailyKos, Jed Lewison has a clip from FOX News, where they blamed the weather for the pathetic turnout. Seriously, the weather. I can report that it was cloudy and a little drizzly here in DC today. That's it. Jed notes: Yeah, the weather really killed the rally. Just like the only reason the rallies were so big in Wisconsin was its gorgeous mid-winter weather (complete with sunny blue skies and palm trees!)."

"Or here's another thought: maybe the tea party fizzle has something to do with the fact that the tea party isn't popular anymore."

http://www.americablog.com/2011/03/capitol-hill-rally-expecting-thousands.html

April 4, 2011 at 1:45 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I just noticed something about clay's family that looks like an American family. The boy's pants are so loose he has to hold them up.

How come the girl is not sporting tattoos and body jewelry?

April 4, 2011 at 1:49 p.m.
limric said...

canarysong,

You gotta give the Tea Party (as misguided as they are) some credit. They started doing something.

I went to one of their rallies once. They were fired up. Lets hope that the flames that got the Tea Party boiling will spread the wildfire started in Wisconsin.

The revolution will be televised.

P.S. In case you're wondering (or even care) where "The revolution will be televised" comes from. I comes from a poetic beat by Gil Scott Heron titled "The revolution will NOT be televised". I just flipped it. Linked - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGaRtq...

April 4, 2011 at 2:14 p.m.
rolando said...

Once again, Harp, you have stated your argument well re private vs government charity. Great post.

April 4, 2011 at 2:25 p.m.
rolando said...

dude, you are ranting on the subject of supporting government-run charities. What you mean is let the rich pay to support the poor, right?

You would have it make more sense financially to go on the dole and become totally dependent on the government than to make your own way. Oh, wait! We're already there! Never mind.

April 4, 2011 at 2:29 p.m.
fairmon said...

canarysong,

Read post at 9:44 pm. Tell me where I am wrong. You and all those that advocate an inefficient, impersonal, unfeeling central government handling welfare contribute as much to the problem as those in congress that prostitute themselves to the financial industry and other select corporations at the expense of small business and responsible corporations that do pay taxes.

Insist on tax reform, increase taxes to address the debt and for health care but I would appreciate it if you would get your hand out of my pocket for general welfare. Allow me to make a liberal contribution to where I want to and where I know it will truly assist the unfortunate. I would like to take you on a tour and show you just what government welfare really does. It may be the best example of how not to on earth.

Why do people not try to understand why jobs are leaving and will continue leaving this country at a record pace? What choice do those moving have? They are not in business and I don't invest in them so they can be altruistic and spread my money around like the government does. Abolish all business deductions, reductions, and other potential loop holes and set a fixed rate on all U.S. business profits at 15%. Net tax revenue will increase and they will invest in America in such a predictable environment. Allow them to reduce their U.S. taxes by any amount paid on foreign profits in those countries and they will bring the over 1.2 trillion home.

How are the mobs you mention with their candles and the tea party different? Neither seem to have a grasp of what it is they really want. You cannot borrow and spend yourself to prosperity and you can't cut enough to keep the debt from doubling at some rate. It is not popular to increase taxes but it is necessary at all levels plus reduced spending. Look for your self, you can take 100% of the income from those considered wealthy and still not balance the budget.

WAKE UP...democrats are just as idiotic and opportunistic as the republicans with or without the tea group.

I would rather my elected negotiator quit trying to change the process but simply say here is how much money we have, that is all there is. If that isn't sufficient then we will reconvene when we get more money or you decide differently. You can home school your own children and other parents will have to make different arrangements since public schools will be closed until the impasse ends.

canarysong, my esteemed colleague from an unrecognizable aisle, join a religious entity and pay tithes then when they have built a cathedral and other social accommodations with their tax exempt status for you and other members insist they support worthy causes. And, insist the government allow me to directly support eligible charities and deduct the contribution from taxes. This would save the 50% or so government administrative cost.

April 4, 2011 at 3:19 p.m.
fairmon said...

Rolando,

Thank you.

April 4, 2011 at 3:27 p.m.
canarysong said...

Harp,

"canarysong, my esteemed colleague from an unrecognizable aisle, join a religious entity and pay tithes then when they have built a cathedral and other social accommodations with their tax exempt status for you and other members insist they support worthy causes."

Like I said, I'm trying to meet a deadline, but....

Huh?...... Seriously?

You must be confusing me with someone else!

April 4, 2011 at 3:31 p.m.
CarolinaGal said...

The Democrats budget like their home mortgage schemes ... and the country will be foreclosed on if it continues.

April 4, 2011 at 4:35 p.m.

What works in the world: Affiliation

"A century ago, when individuals applied for material assistance, charity volunteers tried first to "restore family ties that have been sundered" and "reabsorb in social life those who for some reason have snapped the threads that bound them to other members of the community." Instead of immediately offering help, charities asked, "Who is bound to help in this case?" Mary Richmond of the Baltimore Charity Organizing Society summed up in 1897 the wisdom of a century: "Relief given without reference to friends and neighbors is accompanied by moral loss. Poor neighborhoods are doomed to grow poorer whenever the natural ties of neighborliness are weakened by well-meant but unintelligent interference."

"Today, before developing a foundation project or contributing to a private charity, we should ask: "Does it work through families, neighbors, and religious or community organizations, or does it supersede them?" For example, studies show that many homeless alcoholics have families, but they do not want to be with them. When homeless shelters provide food, clothing, and housing without asking hard questions, aren't they subsidizing disaffiliation and enabling addiction? Instead of giving aid directly to homeless men, why not work on reuniting them with brothers, sisters, parents, wives, or children?

"We should ask, as well, whether other programs help or hurt. It's good to help an unmarried teenager mother, but much such aid now offers a mirage of independence. A better plan is to reunite her whenever possible with those on whom she actually depends, whether she admits it or not: her parents and the child's father. It's good to give Christmas presents to poor children, but when the sweet-minded "helper" shows up with a shiny new fire truck that outshines the second-hand items a poor single mom put together, the damage is done. A better plan is to bulwark the beleaguered mom by enabling her to provide a better present."

from "Transforming Welfare: The Revival of American Charity" by Marvin Olasky

April 4, 2011 at 5:04 p.m.

What works in the world: Bonding

"When applicants for help a century ago were truly alone, volunteers worked one-on-one to become, in essence, new family members. Charity volunteers a century ago usually were not assigned to massive food-dispensing tasks but were given the narrow but deep responsibility of making a difference in one life over several years. Kindness and firmness were both essential: The magazine American Hebrew in 1898 told of how one man was sunk into dependency, but a volunteer "with great patience convinced him that he must earn his living"; soon he did and regained the respect of his family and community. Similarly, a woman had become demoralized, but "for months she was worked with, now through kindness, again through discipline, until finally she began to show a desire to help herself."

"Today, when an unmarried pregnant teenager is dumped by her boyfriend and abandoned by angry parents who refuse to be reconciled, she needs a haven, a room in a home with a volunteer family. When a single mom at the end of her rope cannot take care of a toddler, he should be placed quickly for adoption where a new and permanent bonding can take place, rather than rotated through a succession of foster homes. Some failed programs spend a lot of money but are too stingy in what is truly important: treating people as human beings made in God's image, not as animals."

from "Transforming Welfare: The Revival of American Charity" by Marvin Olasky

April 4, 2011 at 5:09 p.m.

What works in the world: Categorization

"Charities a century ago realized that two persons in exactly the same material circumstances, but with different values, need different treatment: One might benefit most from some material help and a pat on the back, the other might need spiritual challenge and a push. Those who were orphaned, elderly, or disabled received aid; jobless adults who were "able and willing to work" received help in job-finding; "those who prefer to live on alms" and those of "confirmed intemperance" were not entitled to material assistance.

"Work tests" helped both in sorting and in providing relief with dignity. When an able-bodied man came to a homeless shelter, he often was asked to chop wood for two hours or to whitewash a building; in that way he could provide part of his own support and also help those unable to chop. A needy woman generally was given a seat in the "sewing room" (often near a child care room) and asked to work on garments that would be donated to the helpless poor or sent through the Red Cross to families suffering from the effects of hurricanes or tornadoes. The work test, along with teaching good habits and keeping away those who did not really need help, also enabled charities to teach the lesson that those who were being helped could help others.

"Today, don't we need to stop talking about "the poor" in abstraction and start distinguishing once again between those who truly yearn for help and those who just want an enabler? Programs have the chance to succeed only when categories are established and firmly maintained. Work tests can help: Why shouldn't some homeless men clean up streets and parks and remove graffiti? Now, as thousands of crack babies born addicted to cocaine and often deserted by mothers who care only for the next high, languish in hospitals under bright lights and with almost no human contact, why shouldn't homeless women (some are psychotic or sick, but others are healthy and gentle) be assigned to hold a baby for an hour in exchange for food and shelter?"

from "Transforming Welfare: The Revival of American Charity" by Marvin Olasky

April 4, 2011 at 5:12 p.m.

All this is from research conducted on what we might learn from effective practices in addressing poverty relief from 100 years ago. No system or prescription is all-encompassing or perfect, but I see these principles working on a weekly basis.

(There's more.)

April 4, 2011 at 5:17 p.m.
fairmon said...

canarysong,

After you read the earlier post you will understand. You don't have to be religious to join a church or synagogue most that are members don't really follow the teachings of whatever establishment they attend, a non-believer could fit right in. Then you could steer them to doing welfare work for your special interest. Getting your hand(the government) out of my pocket would enable me to direct my contributions to charitable causes of my choice.

April 4, 2011 at 7:12 p.m.
fairmon said...

wwwtw,

Good post. I hope many read and think about it.

April 4, 2011 at 7:15 p.m.
rolando said...

wwwtw: Good stuff.

Unfortunately the solutions do not meet the needs of our socialist government and those who support its dependency paradigm and they won't bother with them. Sigh.

All those dependents make "good" voters.

April 5, 2011 at 6:42 a.m.

What works in the world: Discernment

"Intelligent giving and intelligent withholding are alike true charity," the New Orleans Charity Organization Society declared in 1899. "If drink has made a man poor, money will feed not him, but his drunkenness." Poverty fighters a century ago trained volunteers to leave behind a conventional attitude toward the poor, seeing them through the comfortable haze of their own intentions. Barriers against fraud were important not only to prevent waste but to preserve morale among those who were working hard to remain independent: "Nothing is more demoralizing to the struggling poor than successes of the indolent."

"Bad charity also created uncertainty among givers as to how their contributions would be used, and led to less giving over the long term: It was important to "reform those mild, well-meaning, tender-hearted, sweet-voiced criminals who insist upon indulging in indiscriminate charity." Compassion was greatest when givers could "work with safety, confidence, and liberty." Today, lack of discernment in helping poor individuals is rapidly producing an anticompassion backlash, as the better-off—unable to distinguish between the truly needy and the grubby-grabby—give to neither."

from "Transforming Welfare: The Revival of American Charity" by Marvin Olasky

April 5, 2011 at 8:46 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.