Saturday, January 23, 2010

SC Lt Gov Andre Bauer compares poor to stray dogs

Photo of Lt Gov Andre Bauer from 67 Degrees.

~*~


Those of you who wondered why we weren't so all-fired anxious to get rid of our wayward governor, Mark Sanford, down here in South Carolina... well, this should solve the enduring political puzzle at long last. Next in line for the job would be Lt. Governor Andre Bauer, whom I have written about quite a bit here at DEAD AIR.

And Bauer has just distinguished himself in his inimitable fashion, at a town hall meeting in Fountain Inn, comparing poor people to stray dogs.

I could never make this stuff up:

Bauer equates 'stray animals' to people in speech on aid to needy
Lieutenant governor says those receiving help 'owe something back'
By Nathaniel Cary • Staff Writer • January 23, 2010


Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer drew a comparison to “feeding stray animals” during a speech about people on government assistance, “babies having babies,” and parents whose children are on free and reduced-price lunch.

Bauer, who's running for the Republican nomination for governor, made his remarks during a town hall meeting in Fountain Inn that included state lawmakers and about 115 residents.

“My grandmother was not a highly educated woman but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed. You're facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don't think too much further than that. And so what you've got to do is you've got to curtail that type of behavior. They don't know any better,” Bauer said.

In South Carolina, 58 percent of students participate in the free and reduced-price lunch program, 45.5 percent in Greenville County.

Bauer's remarks came during a speech in which he said government should take away assistance if those receiving help didn't pass drug tests or attend parent-teacher conferences or PTA meetings if their children were receiving free and reduced-price lunches.

Bauer later told The Greenville News on Friday that he wasn't saying people on government assistance “were animals or anything else.”

In his speech to the group, Bauer said people have to become more engaged with government.

“You see, for the first time in the history of this country, we've got more people voting for a living than we do working for a living,” he said.

What the hell is he talking about, Daisy interrupts to ask indignantly. Jesus H. Christ.

And of course, it just gets worse.

Later in his speech, he said, “I can show you a bar graph where free and reduced lunch has the worst test scores in the state of South Carolina,” adding, “You show me the school that has the highest free and reduced lunch and I'll show you the worst test scores, folks. It's there, period. So how do you fix it? Well you say, ‘Look, if you receive goods or services from the government then you owe something back.'”

Bauer said during the speech that there are no “repercussions” from accepting government assistance.

“We don't make you take a drug test. We ought to. We don't even make you show up to your child's parent-teacher conference meeting or to the PTA meeting,” Bauer said.

“You go to a school where there's an active participation of parents and guess what? They have the highest test scores. So what do you do? You say, ‘Look folks, if you receive goods or services from the government and you don't attend a parent-teacher conference, bam, you lose your benefits.' We're going to have to do things like that. We can't afford to keep just giving money away.”

And he said it was time to confront “babies having babies, somebody's got to talk about. Politicians don't want to talk about it anymore because it's politically incorrect.”

Later, Bauer told The Greenville News that “people in society have certain responsibilities, just like if you don't pay your taxes, there are certain repercussions.”

He said government hasn't made requirements to make those receiving aid be more responsible.

“They can continue to have more and more kids and the reward is there's more and more money in it for them.”

Instead, he said the government should place incentives in its welfare programs such as providing child care so parents can work or receive education so they can break the welfare cycle.

Government continues to reward bad behavior by giving money to people who “don't have to do a thing,” he said.

Does this include corporate welfare, such as subsidizing Boeing's expensive move to South Carolina--to the tune of a 60% tax break? (And how many millions does that eventually work out to? Never was too good at math!) I agree, that kind of welfare sucks! Not to mention the bloodsuckers who keep running for office and pandering to the lowest element in our society. What are THEY giving back? Are these party hacks good for South Carolina, or do they just contribute to the continuing stereotype of us as a bunch of stupid, xenophobic rednecks?

Is Bauer proposing we take away free lunches from the kids with bad parents--the ones who test positive for drugs and won't attend school conferences, et. al.? Punish the kids for the parents' behavior, isn't that what he is advocating?

Interestingly (and hypocritically), Andre Bauer is a major pro-lifer, and takes the OPPOSITE line when the subject is abortion: Why punish the baby for the behavior of the parents? Like Mike Huckabee, whom he supported for president, Bauer does not believe in any legal exceptions for abortion in the cases of rape or incest; and this is the moral defense he and Huckabee repeatedly offer. So, apparently, it's okay to punish kids for what their parents do, as long as they are already born! Just not in the womb! The womb is sacrosanct, but once they are born? Fuck them and their free lunches!

(((blood boils)))

Anyway, now you know why Sanford is still the governor. Everyone here in SC already knows.

32 comments:

D. said...

AAAAAUUUUUuuuuuuuuggggghhhh!

(I will not characterize a state by the idiots in high office. I will not characterize a state by the idiots in high office. I will not characterize a state by the idiots in high office. I will not characterize a state by the idiots in high office. I will not characterize a state by the idiots in high office...)

screpublican1956 said...

Bauer never said anything about taking food from children, nor did he compare the needy to stray animals. He simply said welfare benefits should be taken away from lazy recipients who won’t even lift a finger to help themselves or their children. And the American taxpayers agree with him.
Follow this link to his actual statement and you’ll see for yourself: http://www.greenvilleonline.com/section/VideoNetwork?bctid=62943285001#/Local+News/Lt.+Gov.+Andre+Bauer/48541636001/48724975001/62943285001
Here’s a statement Andre’s office put out today in response to the media’s distortion of his comments:
Andre Bauer offers additional comments on “breeding a culture of dependency”
“Big difference between being truly needy and truly lazy”
At a forum this week, I spoke out in favor of finding ways to break the government’s cycle of handouts and dependency.
Yes, I believe government is “breeding a culture of dependency” which has grown out of control, and frankly, amounts to little more than socialism, paid for by hard-working, tax-paying families… against their wishes.
At the same time, I feel strongly that we can and should help our neighbors who are truly needy. In fact, I’ve spent much of my last seven years helping those in need… traveling the state to help provide blankets, shoes, food, and health care to those who need it most.
However, there’s a big difference between being truly needy and truly lazy.
My suggestion to require parents of children who receive free lunches to attend parent-teacher conferences is simply a common-sense idea to help break the cycle of dependency, while at the same time providing a better education and a brighter future for the children affected.
Requiring drug testing for adults receiving tax-funded benefits is also just good, plain, common sense.
Yes, I am speaking out for such requirements, even though they may be “politically incorrect” in the eyes of the news media. It’s better for the children, it’s better for the taxpayers, and, in the end, offering a hand up instead of a hand out will be better for those who have become taxpayer dependents.
Americans are a compassionate people who will always help their brothers who are truly in need. But we cannot and will not allow those who are simply “riding the system” to continue to do so without consequence.
Warren Buffet once said, “No one washes a rental car.” He’s right. We must find ways to instill some sense of responsibility or consequence into those who are now a part of the cycle of automatic hand-outs.
Generational welfare is bad for the people on it and bad for the state of South Carolina.

DaisyDeadhead said...

Cut the bullshit. You admit it yourself, right here: Requiring drug testing for adults receiving tax-funded benefits is also just good, plain, common sense.

And if the parents fail? You are in favor of revoking these benefits, yes? Otherwise, why bother to test at all? Why should the govt undertake an expensive and illegal (from civil liberties standpoint, which of course means it will be even more expensive since it will be challenged in court) program to test wekfare recipients unless these tests have some tangible meaning and results in the real world? Republicans aren't going to waste taxpayer's money on tests with no real RESULTS, are they? How utterly and totally fiscally unsound and wasteful is that?

So, in effect, children will be starved and punished for what their parents do.

Or is this just bullshit, and the expensive testing procedures will mean nothing except PR and squeezing the ultraconservative base for, as the prolife movement mostly has been?

It's one or the other. There is no other alternative possible. Which is it?

PS: What about the corporate welfare? Why is that okay? I agree, corporations need to break the welfare habit.. lets start at the top rather than at the bottom, okay? Millions of dollars vs a few hundred per person--obviously we see who the true thieves/cheats are.

DaisyDeadhead said...

Typos, sorry; its welfare not wekfare... and this sentence should read:

Or is this just bullshit, and the expensive testing procedures will mean nothing except PR and squeezing the ultraconservative base for MONEY, as the prolife movement mostly has been?

Left out the most important word. ;)

jovan b. said...

yes Lt. Gov. Bauer did say that, SCrepublican1956. He did compare every poor person, including those working 20 hours a day to make ends meet, as stray dogs. Don't try to pull that intellectually dishonest bullshit on Daisy's blog.

Corporate welfare is the thing that we must stop dead in its tracks. Corporations have become a cancer to our country and it is spreading like wildfire. It is long past time that we rein in the markets and put a limit on this.

SnowdropExplodes said...

"frankly, amounts to little more than socialism"

You use that word, but I do not think it means what you think it means.

I would point out that it has been demonstrated that free-market capitalism results in dependency - in order to function, there must be a reserve force of workers who are out of work, to produce competition to drive down wages; this reserve force must, logically, be dependent upon handouts in the meantime (handouts that are significantly lower than the wages being offered).

Thus, what you call being "truly lazy" is also a by-product of free market capitalism: the people whom you so freely describe as "lazy" genuinely have no jobs available to them - they are the excess that is used to drive down wages, and they cannot do that unless they are not offered jobs until those currently in work start to complain their wages are too low.

Socialism, on the other hand, has as one goal 100% employment (minus a small fraction to cover those who are genuinely moving from one job to another) and thus 100% involvement in the economic life and democracy of a country.

One last point: did it ever occur to you that the best way to get good education is to put money into schools, and into the children's homes? Enforcing attendance at parent-teacher meetings would be a cosmetic change at best and would do nothing to affect the underlying causes of what you term "generational welfare". Paying for good teachers, for good teaching rooms, for good teaching aids, good textbooks, good computers, good paper and pencils and desks and chairs and blackboards... in short, paying (a LOT of money) for good schools is the only way to address the problem. But that would mean increasing taxes, which makes it anathema to you. Even though it is exactly the "hand-up" you would talk about!

Daisy and Jovan B. have a good way to recoup some of that money - quit giving it to corporations!

yinyang said...

WOW.

"You're facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don't think too much further than that. And so what you've got to do is you've got to curtail that type of behavior."

Sounds very eugenics-y to me.

white rabbit said...

"and frankly, amounts to little more than socialism"

Oh well.

That's the end of the argument.

Must be.

He said the 's' word (I assume this is a he).

QED

:-O

JoJo said...

At the risk of being chewed out by you and your super liberal/leftie readers, I agree with what he said. I am 100% against this massive breeding and subsequent welfare. I am for zero population growth. I have no kids and I don't mind doing my fair share, but I'm sick of the breeding welfare queens. It's not PC to say it, but I agree. If they are getting a handout by way of free/reduced cost lunches, then they need to be responsible for their kids and pitch in. In fact, if the people are out of work and collecting welfare, they should be required to volunteer at their kids' schools. Any parent who has a skill and who is out of work, should be at the schools pitching in doing maintenance, painting, classroom assistance, etc. IMHO.

However, he IS a hypocrite b/c he isn't walking the walk with his other viewpoints on abortion and that tax break to Boeing is unreal. You never did blog on that.

DaisyDeadhead said...

Jojo, how far are you willing to go with that? Forced abortion, as in China? If not, jail time? Legally taking children away from their parents? Where will all the foster parents come from? And you do realize that foster parents are paid by the govt too? (Drug testing for the foster parents also, or just for the legal parents?)

You do know I was on public assistance myself once? I have worked for well over 20 yrs, but I briefly did need help. The vast majority of women on welfare are like me, and are on it for less than two years (as I was). Are you in favor of punishing the men, or just the women? If so--what about all the "unclaimed" kids with no legal fathers on record? Are you in favor of enforcing DNA testing at about $800 a pop? Paid for by the govt? Because that ain't cheap. Neither is mandatory drug testing. Where will you get the money for all this?

Would my lifestyle have passed muster when I was on welfare? Probably not, if judged by the likes of Bauer.

I have been able to work and contribute as a taxpayer for the past 20 yrs, all because of the help I got back in 1985... if I hadn't, I likely wouldn't be here at all, and neither would my child. So I do take this issue very personally.

You, Bauer, and any other ppl who thinks like him are *very lucky* and that's all well and good, but some of us were BORN poor, on welfare AS CHILDREN and were somewhat unlucky as adults too. We don't need to be penalized for that by someone who had all the breaks. Ask the ppl in Haiti about how fast luck can turn... the same Republicans who don't care about starving the poor kids, won't care about starving YOU when you need Social Security or Medicaid. After all, they've got theirs, why don't you? Look at their policies, they speak for themselves.

First they came for the welfare mothers...

Anonymous said...

Geezzzzzzzz! Don't get me started,D. ;-)
I guess if some people don't have the money to get an education and can't make it on the chicken feed wages offered in this state then we're supposed to cut off aid to them because they're uneducated or stupid or dumb or just plain poor...poor doesn't mean stupid, Stupid! (The latter comment to those it may concern.) And rich or educated doesn't mean that one is intelligent either...of course we do have those parasites who feed off the system both inside and outside of politics. I think they're easily identifiable.) God, what a quandary! It's not as easy as getting a job, we need good paying jobs! And those are less and less every day.(Walmart just cut 11,200 jobs.) And if we are to educate people for better jobs we need to make getting an education easier or more readily available to everyone but especially the poor. Most everyone knows SC educational system is one of the worst in the country. Has anyone mentioned this to AB? A lot of people on welfare are working jobs that pay so little they are forced to go on welfare. Others have to work two and three jobs to make a living. Sad! No problem as long as your health holds up. Or if you can even find a job. It's difficult to find a job, period; likewise job 2&3. We first need to create good jobs so we can put people back to work! Any ideas since everything has gone overseas??? Why don't politicians put their over average egos together and do something about this?

JoJo said...

Well I am, after all, entitled to my opinion on this topic, even if it's not popular, politically correct, or Deadhead-like. I've always said that I'm Fiscally Conservative. In fact, the only things that keep me from being Republican are my views on abortion and gay rights.

My parents were extremely poor as well. My mom was raised during the Depression & has a high school education and one year of vocational training. My dad is from South America. My father only went to school thru about 6th or 8th grade. But he came to this country, became a citizen of the US, fought in WW2 and only had one child. My parents told me stories about when they moved to the Cape in the early 50's, having to split a sandwich b/c that was all there was to eat. My dad nearly died in 1960 and was in the hospital in Boston for 2 months. They were financially ruined after that b/c he couldn't work and mom was trying to work but traveling to see him every day. But they never once took a handout from anyone or from the govt. They made do, and cut back on things and lived very frugally. I wasn't born into wealth at all and I didn't grow up w/ a silver spoon in my mouth either. I'm the most unspoiled only child you'll ever meet.

I have no problem w/ the welfare system giving people, such as yourself, a leg up.

What I object to is people having children they cannot afford, then expecting the tax payers to pay for everything. Those parents need to be held accountable for their kids', esp. their kids' at school. If the parents are getting a handout, then they should give back by volunteering at their kids' schools.

My husband still has no job (it'll be 2 years in August) and still has no health insurance. Unemployment has not made a decision whether or not to restart his benefits. We are hobbling by on my salary and I resent it when my tax dollars go to subsidize people and their many children.

Just my opinion. :)

GCU Prosthetic Conscience said...

SnowdropExplodes wins the thread, for explaining the "reserve army of labor" in a South Carolina blog comment thread. In fact, SnowdropExplodes wins the internet for that. Only quibble: our system is state capitalism, not free-market capitalism. Free-market capitalism is a contradiction in terms.

Sutton said...

JoJo, honey, you are on welfare. Don't kid yourself. Employers pay a tiny portion of your salary into a pool for unemployment. The rest comes from taxpayers' money, which also pays the workers' salaries and keeps the unemployment comp offices open.

Virginia S. Wood, PsyD said...

This is a small detail in the overall scheme of things, but let me list a few reasons why women on welfare aren't at PTA meetings:

(1) No public transportation, no car, and no money for a taxi.
(2) No one to keep the children
(3) Physical disability
(4) Unsafe neighborhoods

Ghost Dansing said...

i found Lt. Gov. Bauer's words a refreshingly frank articulation of Republican political philosophy. The Republican Party, i must remind everyone, harbors some of the finest minds of the 19th Century.... perhaps even the 18th.

but then, of course, tomorrow may belong to them.

Blue Heron said...

I will leave the welfare, socialism arguments for the rest of you to ably sort out, I think Snowdrop does an excellent job. I want to comment on the photo of Bauer at the gym. As a guy who has worked out and lifted weights for over thirty years, I would like to point out that the guy looks like a douche. He has at least 50lbs on each dumbbell and is about to herniate his fourth and fifth lumbar. His form is beyond terrible. I know that he is trying for the macho photo, kind of like Reagan cutting wood on the ranch, but his back should be upright to deadlift or horizontal for rows. I expect to see the next shot of him in traction.

La Lubu said...

I'm sick of the breeding welfare queens

Gee, how many children does it take to be a "breeding welfare queen" in your eyes, JoJo? (it's probably worth a mention that humans do not reproduce via parthenogenesis, and yet no mention of the men). Forty percent of women on "welfare" have one child. Another thirty percent have two children. Another twenty percent have three children. And ten percent have four or more.

Of that ten percent that have four or more children, most are between the ages of 35-45.

So, the myth of breeding welfare queens is just an ugly, racist, sexist stereotype.

Here's a question for you: why are these women who have lost a job less valuable than your husband? Do you rant and rave at him on a daily basis for being a lazy, out-of-work bum for the last two years? Because if not, what makes you think the circumstances of out of work women are any different?

Also, this: Any parent who has a skill and who is out of work, should be at the schools pitching in doing maintenance, painting, classroom assistance, etc. would require the firing of maintenance people, janitors, lunchroom personnel, and teacher's aides---adding more folks to the unemployment (or welfare!) rolls. Not really a good plan.

(I don't know why I bother to say anything; SnowdropExplodes already said it all w/r/t mandatory unemployment to enrich the wealthy...)

I'm an electrician. Our contractors fought hard (many years ago...) for drug testing and got it on the contract. The first thing they discovered? Holy shit does that cost a lot of money and drive up the price of a job, and....almost no one is using drugs. They (the contractors) were operating under the influence of stereotypes---and found out in a dramatic way just how bogus those stereotypes were. Ya live, ya learn.

(wrod verification: "horni")

JoJo said...

La Lubu, (please don't read this as a snotty reply b/c it's not meant that way at all) as a matter of fact I DO rant and rave that my husband has been unable to find work. Not just b/c there's NO work to be had up here (Washington State), but because he can't pick his lazy ass up off the damn recliner and HELP me around the house. He suffers from crippling panic attacks. But whereas I was raised in a 'pick yourself up by your bootstraps and get to work' home, he was not. He can't seem to do anything when he's in the throes of the anxiety attacks. Whenever that happens to me, I keep myself busy to keep my mind off things. He can't do that. So I'm working my ass off, commuting, AND I get stuck doing everything around the house on the weekends as well. So yes, I rant and rave quite a bit... not really in blogosphere but in emails to close friends. And believe me, I chew him out constantly when I get home and the dishes aren't done, or the trash isn't out, or he promises to clean the bathroom and 3 days later it's still not clean. So yeah, I DO rant/rave at him too.

My idea of parents pitching in at the schools is on a volunteer basis. To assist the already-employed people, since the schools keep having to make such deep cuts in their budgets and are laying people off. There's a volunteer work force that could be utilized in the way of out of work parents. For example, there's an elementary school at the end of my block that badly needs painting. I've commented often that I'd be happy to volunteer and pitch in to help paint if the school organized something like that.

I guess I'm just in a the very small minority of people who just does not see the need to have baby after baby if you can't afford it. What's the point of bringing a child into such cruel poverty that they cycle is never broken? Usually w/o a father in the picture?

I work in family law, and have done so for the past 20 years. I see all kinds of situations, from wealthy to welfare. So I am basing my opinions on my own personal observances and professional work over the years. We have so many clients with children and expenses that they cannot afford. Is it right to bring kids into the world only to have their homes foreclosed upon & cars repossessed? Forced to move to a new school district? Mothers worrying about how they will put food on the table b/c their no-good ex won't pay support? It's not fair to the kids at all.

I'm sorry if most, if not all, of you disagree with me, but they are, after all, my feelings & opinions, and I would not be so hypocritical as to go along w/ everyone else for the sake of being PC or liberal. I have to be honest, with both myself and others.

Daisy, you and your firestorm topics! lol :p

D. said...

I promise to creeb as loudly as any conservative about all those awful people on tax-paid assistance as soon as the following stuff happens:

1. Comprehensive age-appropriate sex and reproduction education, with classes on contraception and how that works, and none of that "Abstinence Only" crap.

2. Compulsory testing for obstacles to learning such as dyslexia, poor vision, poor hearing, different learning styles, and stuff like that, so that people don't, for example, graduate from elementary school not having learned anything because they've been busy covering their dyslexia and no one has noticed (I knew someone whose dyslexia was discovered in college; the student had covered it so well he was an editor at one of the school's publications. Now that's overcompensation).

3. Well-paid (particularly if disagreeable or socially disregarded) jobs for everyone.

(I bet this won't happen, and conservatives will have all sorts of excuses and "reasons" why it can't happen. They should get out of the way.)

Just slightly cranky this morning.

viagra online said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DaisyDeadhead said...

I think its funny how a post about Andre Bauer brings out all the Viagra spam. Tee hee!

Air force one said...

Helpful this blog for me, I have got lots of information from you.

Generic Cialis said...

I would like to appreciate the great work done You

Generic Viagra | Cheap Generic Viagra | Generic Cialis |
propecia | Generic Viagra

Alice Thomas said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
costa rica vacation said...

Hello Interesting information about SC Lt Gov Andre Bauer compares poor to stray dogs. Thanks for this useful article.

youlacka said...

That is really very good article. I am glad to know. Thanks for sharing !
kızlarla chat

Nike free run plus said...

there’s a big difference between being truly needy and truly lazy.

Cheap Logo Design said...

It is really a great and useful piece of info. I am glad that you shared this helpful info with us. Please keep us up to date like this. Thank you for sharing.

buy viagra said...

I liked this blog, i think is very interesting, most of all for the new ideas that this blog talk.

PSD To Wordpress said...

Thanks for taking time to discuss this useful topic and share your great experience here with us.Great work keep it up...

Adim said...

I like this post a lot and it contains a lot of great points and obsessions!

Logo Design