Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(KSDK St. Louis)   GOP: States need more rights. Obama: Okay, here's some more states rights. GOP: How dare you usurp states' rights like this   (ksdk.com ) divider line
    More: Asinine, GOP, obama, house ways and means committee, cash assistance, work rule, R-Utah, Robert Rector, Orrin Hatch  
•       •       •

5684 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Jul 2012 at 2:03 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



236 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-17 02:34:23 PM  

EnviroDude: if only there were a way that the President and Democrats could create an environment that would create jobs to help those on welfare that want to work find jobs.

if only


He could start a war?
 
2012-07-17 02:34:49 PM  

jjorsett: How about letting states handle welfare as they see fit, and pay for it themselves? All of them, not just the ones who won't toe the fed line.


Oddly enough, that is exactly what Obama is proposing. States can manage their own welfare to work requirements, and yet, the GOP is whining about it.
 
2012-07-17 02:35:39 PM  

fringedmyotis: hubiestubert: At this point, Obama needs to come out in favor of baseball, football, NASCAR, apple pie, puppies, kittens, long walks on the beach, beer and wings, just to watch Congress repudiate such Socialisms...

And given how he's trolling Congress now, he just might.

Don't forget breathing. He should totally come out in favor of that.


Of course Obama will come out in favor of breathing. He just doesn't understand that easy access to breathing will encourage the poor to stop searching for better ways to get air. That's SOSHALIZM, and besides, it obstructs the state's rights to determine who deserves air by eliminating the work requirement.
 
2012-07-17 02:36:32 PM  

colon_pow: "The president's action is completely misdirected," Romney said. "Work is a dignified endeavor, and the linkage of work and welfare is essential to prevent welfare from becoming a way of life."

not around these parts, Mitt. this is part of the fundamental transformation of America that obama promised.


You truly bring us nothing but stupidity.

i.qkme.me
 
2012-07-17 02:36:32 PM  

dallylamma: hubiestubert: At this point, Obama needs to come out in favor of baseball, football, NASCAR, apple pie, puppies, kittens, long walks on the beach, beer and wings, just to watch Congress repudiate such Socialisms...

And given how he's trolling Congress now, he just might.

[img.ibtimes.com image 850x603]

I think he's already thrown his support behind beer.


ZOMG TAQQIYA!
 
2012-07-17 02:36:38 PM  

Jake Havechek: I can always respect a man who likes a fine stout. Of course if it's not Bud light, Hannity thinks you're a communist or some shiat.


How dare he visit a foreign country and sample their brew! That is an outrage.
 
2012-07-17 02:37:33 PM  

Heraclitus: Didn't the Repubs vote down a Jobs Bill on Friday?

WTF is their problem?


Yeah, well, they needed time to schedule another vote to repeal Obamacare. That jobs bill was taking up too much of the workday.
 
2012-07-17 02:38:15 PM  

colon_pow: "The president's action is completely misdirected," Romney said. "Work is a dignified endeavor, and the linkage of work and welfare is essential to prevent welfare from becoming a way of life."

not around these parts, Mitt. this is part of the fundamental transformation of America that obama promised.


Staying home to care for your family qualifies as "work", right Mitt?
 
2012-07-17 02:38:44 PM  

GOP Messages



Poor class women: You are f*cking up the joint by staying home to raise your kids. You should be out getting a job and making money!

Middle class women: You are f*cking up the joint by working and making money. You should be staying home and raising your kids!
 
2012-07-17 02:38:46 PM  

colon_pow: "The president's action is completely misdirected," Romney said. "Work is a dignified endeavor, and the linkage of work and welfare is essential to prevent welfare from becoming a way of life."


How would Romney know? Did his daddy tell him so?

He'd have to actually do work to do any talking about what it is or is not.
 
2012-07-17 02:39:12 PM  

DamnYankees: How dare Obama try to give states the right to help poor people.


So the whole rewriting of congressional laws is okay with you? CRS has already stated this is in violation of congressional legislation. It purposefully excluded the agency from removing the work laws for grants.

So let me.get this straight... The ussc striking down congressional law is bad, Obama striking down congressional law is good. What a farking hypocrite.

This essentially guts the welfare reforms under Clinton. And you want the gop to agree to tax and cuts? You have no problem undoing reform compromise but expect them to trust you on future agreements?

This is a blatant usurpation of legislation rewrite by the executive and you have no problem with it. Grow up. This is not how government is supposed to function.
 
2012-07-17 02:39:13 PM  

Diogenes: "This power grab by the Obama administration is not a constructive effort to encourage states to think creatively about how to get more people off of welfare and into productive jobs," Hatch said.

Loosening authority is a power grab? WTF?



You see, by doing what Republicans always claim they want to do, Obama has "grabbed" from them any "authority" they may have had in their campaign against him. Can't you see how this is just more failed leadership by Obama?
 
2012-07-17 02:39:17 PM  

THX 1138: "This is a brazen and unwarranted unraveling of welfare reform.

WTF? It's no such thing. If I read it correctly, states have the option of completely sticking with the current system. However this now gives states the _option_ apply for a waiver to the status quo, and attempt a modified welfare model to see if they can do it better.

Or did I get that totally wrong?


No you don't understand. This is allowing the boot-thug feds to pick winners and losers among the states. One hippy commie state may get a waiver allowing them to give flowers to everyone, while a more conservative state will be refused a waiver to lobotomize every welfare recipient.

//Honestly I am a bit uncomfortable with the general trend toward these waivers, but in general this is the Republicans opposing everything Obama supports without thought.
 
2012-07-17 02:40:10 PM  
Jesus.

So the administration says it will consider alternative approaches to solving a problem, and the GOP is screaming that means they are abandoning all requirements and just giving away free money to the poors?

fark you GOP. fark you very much.
 
2012-07-17 02:40:25 PM  

Rent Party: jjorsett: How about letting states handle welfare as they see fit, and pay for it themselves? All of them, not just the ones who won't toe the fed line.

Oddly enough, that is exactly what Obama is proposing. States can manage their own welfare to work requirements, and yet, the GOP is whining about it.


I don't think Obama is proposing that the states will be paying for anything themselves....and that's the rub.
 
2012-07-17 02:42:04 PM  

colon_pow: "The president's action is completely misdirected," Romney said. "Work is a dignified endeavor, and the linkage of work and welfare is essential to prevent welfare from becoming a way of life."

not around these parts, Mitt. this is part of the fundamental transformation of America that obama promised.


Mitt should know - he spent 3 years not working because Bain was still paying him $100,000 a year.

Then he retroactively retired and kept the money. I assume as a retroactive unemployment welfare bonus.
 
2012-07-17 02:42:21 PM  

dallylamma: hubiestubert: At this point, Obama needs to come out in favor of baseball, football, NASCAR, apple pie, puppies, kittens, long walks on the beach, beer and wings, just to watch Congress repudiate such Socialisms...

And given how he's trolling Congress now, he just might.

[img.ibtimes.com image 850x603]

I think he's already thrown his support behind beer.


Awesome pic.

punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-07-17 02:42:28 PM  

coeyagi: BillCo / EnviroDude seen picketing an empty Lansing statehouse as Michigan is furiously not trying to figure out how to end welfare reform as we know it.


Wait, why do we think BillCo and EnviroDude are the same user? Is there anything significantly different between the characters that would justify using alts?
 
DGS [TotalFark]
2012-07-17 02:42:55 PM  

vernonFL: [4.bp.blogspot.com image 450x335]

Obama will have us all on welfare and food stamps and living in pubic housing projects. Its the Chicago way.



And who doesn't love pubic housing?
 
2012-07-17 02:43:38 PM  

GhostFish: Jesus.

So the administration says it will consider alternative approaches to solving a problem, and the GOP is screaming that means they are abandoning all requirements and just giving away free money to the poors?

fark you GOP. fark you very much.


The GOP only has two speeds: All Stop, and Damn the Torpedoes, Full Speed Ahead!
 
2012-07-17 02:45:21 PM  

MindStalker: THX 1138: "This is a brazen and unwarranted unraveling of welfare reform.

WTF? It's no such thing. If I read it correctly, states have the option of completely sticking with the current system. However this now gives states the _option_ apply for a waiver to the status quo, and attempt a modified welfare model to see if they can do it better.

Or did I get that totally wrong?

No you don't understand. This is allowing the boot-thug feds to pick winners and losers among the states. One hippy commie state may get a waiver allowing them to give flowers to everyone, while a more conservative state will be refused a waiver to lobotomize every welfare recipient.

//Honestly I am a bit uncomfortable with the general trend toward these waivers, but in general this is the Republicans opposing everything Obama supports without thought.


I kind of like the waiver approach to things.

It provides a baseline, but then gives states the opportunity to propose different implementations based on their specific strengths and needs. Not all of the states are the same, and it doesn't seem reasonable to me to just expect "one-size-fits-all" rules to work for all of them. Allowing them to propose alternatives seems rational.
 
2012-07-17 02:45:23 PM  
Found this article that better explains the whole thing.

I think the members of the Right simply have a directive to scream as loudly as possible no matter what the Obama Administration is doing. Don't think - just scream.
 
2012-07-17 02:46:12 PM  

Jake Havechek: Outline your plan to save the economy, please. Be detailed and specific, please.


1. White Republican President
 
2012-07-17 02:46:50 PM  
Republicans love to whine.

Mental capacity of children.
 
2012-07-17 02:46:55 PM  

Jackson Herring: Jake Havechek: Outline your plan to save the economy, please. Be detailed and specific, please.

1. White Republican President


2. give tax breaks to wealthy.

3. profit
 
2012-07-17 02:47:14 PM  
Money for nothing and checks for free.
 
2012-07-17 02:47:35 PM  

Heraclitus: Didn't the Repubs vote down a Jobs Bill on Friday?

WTF is their problem?


It didn't have tax cuts for the rich in it, so it went to filibuster.
 
2012-07-17 02:48:15 PM  

THX 1138: "This is a brazen and unwarranted unraveling of welfare reform.

WTF? It's no such thing. If I read it correctly, states have the option of completely sticking with the current system. However this now gives states the _option_ apply for a waiver to the status quo, and attempt a modified welfare model to see if they can do it better.

Or did I get that totally wrong?


You have it wrong. The original reforms required a percentage of welfare recipients to begin working or being in useful training to work in the future. This was to end the cycle of institutional welfare, ie stop the welfare for life if able to work. The law explicitly states that the federal agency in charge of these block grants can not modify these work rules without congress. Obama has undone this against the analysis of the CRS when this was tried years ago. He basically has undone the welfare reform requirements passed under Clinton in complete violation of the actual law. The intent was to force modifications of this back to congress instead of decree by executive. Obama doesn't give a fark about whataws say and is marching in opposition to the law on the books.

This act Indies the reform, it does not modify it. It takes requirements back to before the passed welfare reform compromise. It is bullshiat and liberals are farking hypocrites for supporting rewrite by fiat, especially after knocking bush for signing statements, this is a step beyond signing statements.
 
2012-07-17 02:48:40 PM  

Dog Welder: Heraclitus: Didn't the Repubs vote down a Jobs Bill on Friday?

WTF is their problem?

It didn't have tax cuts for the rich in it, so it went to filibuster.


And yesterday, they voted down small business tax credits because.... see bold above.
 
2012-07-17 02:48:50 PM  

T. Dawg: Found this article that better explains the whole thing.

I think the members of the Right simply have a directive to scream as loudly as possible no matter what the Obama Administration is doing. Don't think - just scream.


Hence why hubie is suggesting Obama support things like breathing or why the video Karac posted is so apt and hilarious.
 
2012-07-17 02:48:51 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2012-07-17 02:49:04 PM  
img254.imageshack.us
 
2012-07-17 02:49:21 PM  

Serious Black: GhostFish: Jesus.

So the administration says it will consider alternative approaches to solving a problem, and the GOP is screaming that means they are abandoning all requirements and just giving away free money to the poors?

fark you GOP. fark you very much.

The GOP only has two speeds: All Stop, and Damn the Torpedoes, Full Speed Ahead Reverse!


Because they pine for the heady days when certain people were property and gay was happy; no one was oppressed and no one was left wanting, and every man was free to run his business and his life how he damn well pleased.

Hmmm. Maybe this is the right fix?

The GOP only has two speeds: All Stop, and Damn the Torpedoes, Full Speed Ahead Retard!
 
2012-07-17 02:50:38 PM  

MyRandomName: DamnYankees: How dare Obama try to give states the right to help poor people.

So the whole rewriting of congressional laws is okay with you? CRS has already stated this is in violation of congressional legislation. It purposefully excluded the agency from removing the work laws for grants.

So let me.get this straight... The ussc striking down congressional law is bad, Obama striking down congressional law is good. What a farking hypocrite.

This essentially guts the welfare reforms under Clinton. And you want the gop to agree to tax and cuts? You have no problem undoing reform compromise but expect them to trust you on future agreements?

This is a blatant usurpation of legislation rewrite by the executive and you have no problem with it. Grow up. This is not how government is supposed to function.


9/10.

Very high quality, even if unintentional, I forsee many bites
 
2012-07-17 02:50:43 PM  

MyRandomName: THX 1138: "This is a brazen and unwarranted unraveling of welfare reform.

WTF? It's no such thing. If I read it correctly, states have the option of completely sticking with the current system. However this now gives states the _option_ apply for a waiver to the status quo, and attempt a modified welfare model to see if they can do it better.

Or did I get that totally wrong?

You have it wrong. The original reforms required a percentage of welfare recipients to begin working or being in useful training to work in the future. This was to end the cycle of institutional welfare, ie stop the welfare for life if able to work. The law explicitly states that the federal agency in charge of these block grants can not modify these work rules without congress. Obama has undone this against the analysis of the CRS when this was tried years ago. He basically has undone the welfare reform requirements passed under Clinton in complete violation of the actual law. The intent was to force modifications of this back to congress instead of decree by executive. Obama doesn't give a fark about whataws say and is marching in opposition to the law on the books.

This act Indies the reform, it does not modify it. It takes requirements back to before the passed welfare reform compromise. It is bullshiat and liberals are farking hypocrites for supporting rewrite by fiat, especially after knocking bush for signing statements, this is a step beyond signing statements.


What you said does in no way disprove what is bolded above. You just kept strawmanning about Obama circumventing the law, but in effect, nothing could conceivably change.

WELL! DONE!
 
2012-07-17 02:50:59 PM  

EnviroDude: if only there were a way that the President and Democrats could create an environment that would create jobs to help those on welfare that want to work find jobs.

if only


You sound tired E.Dude.
 
2012-07-17 02:51:13 PM  

MyRandomName: DamnYankees: How dare Obama try to give states the right to help poor people.

So the whole rewriting of congressional laws is okay with you? CRS has already stated this is in violation of congressional legislation. It purposefully excluded the agency from removing the work laws for grants.

So let me.get this straight... The ussc striking down congressional law is bad, Obama striking down congressional law is good. What a farking hypocrite.

This essentially guts the welfare reforms under Clinton. And you want the gop to agree to tax and cuts? You have no problem undoing reform compromise but expect them to trust you on future agreements?

This is a blatant usurpation of legislation rewrite by the executive and you have no problem with it. Grow up. This is not how government is supposed to function.


Except for the fact that all this does is give the states greater flexibility in how they administer their 'Workfare' programs so that more people can transition from welfare to an actual job. It's not removing the work requirement at all.

But seeing as you usually post with your head so firmly wedged up your ass, I can't expect that you would actually read what the waivers are doing and find out the truth instead of perpetuating the right wing outrage du jour.
 
2012-07-17 02:51:42 PM  
Myth: Obama is doing this to give states more control.

Reality: Obama is doing this to get more people on welfare.

But that has nothing to do with the fact that the more dependent you are on government the more likely you are to vote for Obama.
 
2012-07-17 02:52:25 PM  

randomjsa: Myth: Obama is doing this to give states more control.

Reality: Obama is doing this to get more people on welfare.

But that has nothing to do with the fact that the more dependent you are on government the more likely you are to vote for Obama.


I live with my mom. CITATION NEEDED.
 
2012-07-17 02:52:49 PM  

MyRandomName: THX 1138: "This is a brazen and unwarranted unraveling of welfare reform.

WTF? It's no such thing. If I read it correctly, states have the option of completely sticking with the current system. However this now gives states the _option_ apply for a waiver to the status quo, and attempt a modified welfare model to see if they can do it better.

Or did I get that totally wrong?

You have it wrong. The original reforms required a percentage of welfare recipients to begin working or being in useful training to work in the future. This was to end the cycle of institutional welfare, ie stop the welfare for life if able to work. The law explicitly states that the federal agency in charge of these block grants can not modify these work rules without congress. Obama has undone this against the analysis of the CRS when this was tried years ago. He basically has undone the welfare reform requirements passed under Clinton in complete violation of the actual law. The intent was to force modifications of this back to congress instead of decree by executive. Obama doesn't give a fark about whataws say and is marching in opposition to the law on the books.

This act Indies the reform, it does not modify it. It takes requirements back to before the passed welfare reform compromise. It is bullshiat and liberals are farking hypocrites for supporting rewrite by fiat, especially after knocking bush for signing statements, this is a step beyond signing statements.


No, Obama has not done any of the farking shiat you say he has done. Here's a direct quote from the memorandum his assistant secretary sent out: "The Secretary will not use her authority to allow use of TANF funds to provide assistance to individuals or families subject to the TANF prohibitions on assistance." How the flying fark can that possibly be translated into Obama gutting welfare reform?!
 
2012-07-17 02:53:28 PM  

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Damn that Fartbongo, letting states determine their own policies! If he approves of it. WTF is his problem?


FTFY
 
2012-07-17 02:53:48 PM  

MyRandomName: DamnYankees: How dare Obama try to give states the right to help poor people.

So the whole rewriting of congressional laws is okay with you? CRS has already stated this is in violation of congressional legislation. It purposefully excluded the agency from removing the work laws for grants.

So let me.get this straight... The ussc striking down congressional law is bad, Obama striking down congressional law is good. What a farking hypocrite.

This essentially guts the welfare reforms under Clinton. And you want the gop to agree to tax and cuts? You have no problem undoing reform compromise but expect them to trust you on future agreements?

This is a blatant usurpation of legislation rewrite by the executive and you have no problem with it. Grow up. This is not how government is supposed to function.


You've already shown with your various posts on the Politics tab that you haven't even the slightest idea of how government is supposed to function, so you should probably shut the fark up on this one. You're only going to end up looking stupid. Again.
 
2012-07-17 02:54:19 PM  

I alone am best: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Damn that Fartbongo, letting states determine their own policies! If he approves of it. WTF is his problem?

FTFY


I live with my mom. Lie.

Next bridge-dweller please. This is gonna be a long thread.....
 
2012-07-17 02:54:25 PM  

MyRandomName: You have no problem undoing reform compromise but expect them to trust you on future agreements?


Like the GOP hasn't spent the better part of this year trying to squirm out of the defense cuts written into the debt ceiling agreement?

This is not how government is supposed to function.

Right, government is suppose to function with one party doing everything they can to sabotage the sitting President so they can get their rubber stamp guy back in. In fact clearly the entire point of a filibuster when it was conceived was to be a mechanism to ensure that a 60 vote supermajority in the Senate was required to do ANYTHING.

The GOP threw out the "How Government is Supposed to Function" in January of 2009.
 
2012-07-17 02:54:37 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Serious Black: GhostFish: Jesus.

So the administration says it will consider alternative approaches to solving a problem, and the GOP is screaming that means they are abandoning all requirements and just giving away free money to the poors?

fark you GOP. fark you very much.

The GOP only has two speeds: All Stop, and Damn the Torpedoes, Full Speed Ahead Reverse!

Because they pine for the heady days when certain people were property and gay was happy; no one was oppressed and no one was left wanting, and every man was free to run his business and his life how he damn well pleased.

Hmmm. Maybe this is the right fix?

The GOP only has two speeds: All Stop, and Damn the Torpedoes, Full Speed Ahead Retard!


I think the latter is the correct way to put it. Thanks for the input!
 
2012-07-17 02:54:43 PM  

colon_pow: "The president's action is completely misdirected," Romney said. "Work is a dignified endeavor, and the linkage of work and welfare is essential to prevent welfare from becoming a way of life."

not around these parts, Mitt. this is part of the fundamental transformation of America that obama promised.


Minimum wage is nowhere near enough to get off the government teat.
 
2012-07-17 02:55:34 PM  
From what I understand the work requirements are causing some problems for state when there is no work to be found. The states then have to create substitute work (like a resume writing class) which costs money, requires administration and helps no one because after 3 or 4 resume-writing classes the recipient's resume isn't going to get any better.

I'm sure Orrin Hatch would be in favor of 8 hours/day of public shaming for welfare recipients regardless of the expense to the states.
 
2012-07-17 02:55:34 PM  

randomjsa: Reality: Obama is doing this to get more people on welfare.


Do I dare ask what, in your universe, could possibly be Obama's motive for putting more people on welfare?
 
2012-07-17 02:55:34 PM  

Cataholic: Rent Party: jjorsett: How about letting states handle welfare as they see fit, and pay for it themselves? All of them, not just the ones who won't toe the fed line.

Oddly enough, that is exactly what Obama is proposing. States can manage their own welfare to work requirements, and yet, the GOP is whining about it.

I don't think Obama is proposing that the states will be paying for anything themselves....and that's the rub.


States still fund most of their own welfare programs, so that is already happening to a large degree. When they're talking about using federal welfare dollars, the fed can attach whatever strings it wants. In this case, Obama is talking about taking some strings off of those federal dollars, and that power grant back to the states has the GOP all in an uproar.
 
2012-07-17 02:55:48 PM  

Rent Party: jjorsett: How about letting states handle welfare as they see fit, and pay for it themselves? All of them, not just the ones who won't toe the fed line.

Oddly enough, that is exactly what Obama is proposing. States can manage their own welfare to work requirements, and yet, the GOP is whining about it.

The Department of Health and Human Services notified states Thursday that Secretary Kathleen Sebelius would consider waivers "to allow states to test alternative and innovative strategies, policies and procedures that are designed to improve employment outcomes for needy families."


So no, states don't get to manage anything.
 
Displayed 50 of 236 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report