A New York City police officer fatally shot an unarmed black man Thursday evening after the man and his girlfriend opted to take the stairs instead of the elevator in the woman’s apartment building. The couple encountered two police officers in the dimly lit stairwell as they approached the woman’s floor. One of the officers already had his gun drawn while in the stairwell and shot the man, 28-year-old Akai Gurley, once in the chest as the couple came upon the officers. The officer who killed Gurley has been identified as Peter Liang, a rookie officer who was on a probationary assignment patrolling a housing project.
Michelle Butler, Gurley’s girlfriend, recounted the tragic event to the New York Daily News.
“They didn’t identify themselves,” said Butler, 27, who began dating Gurley in January 2011. “No nothing. They didn’t give no explanation. They just pulled a gun and shot him in the chest.”
The terrified couple ran down to the fifth floor before Gurley collapsed in a pool of blood. Butler, who was standing alongside her boyfriend when he was hit, recalled their frantic final moments together as she begged Gurley to keep fighting.
“Yo, you OK? Talk to me!” she recalled shouting. “He wasn’t saying nothing. That was the last thing I said to him.”
Butler said the officers never came down to check on the mortally wounded man, and medical help was only sent after she banged on a neighbor’s door for help.
NYPD commissioner Bill Bratton held a press conference Friday morning to discuss the shooting incident. He stated that it was “an unfortunate tragedy” and said that it appeared to be “an accidental discharge” of the officer’s weapon. Bratton also pointed out that the building had seen two robberies and four assaults recently, perhaps providing cover to the officer regarding why his weapon was drawn as he entered the stairwell.
DNAinfo, a news website covering New York and Chicago neighborhoods, provided the following tweets from the press conference.
— DNAinfo.com New York (@DNAinfo) November 21, 2014
— DNAinfo.com New York (@DNAinfo) November 21, 2014
2 robberies, 4 assaults in past month at housing complex where police-involved shooting took place, Bratton says:http://t.co/HcF0JrCXlm
— DNAinfo.com New York (@DNAinfo) November 21, 2014
— DNAinfo.com New York (@DNAinfo) November 21, 2014
“Coincidence of events,” w/ officers patrolling & victim entering 7th-floor stairwell, led to shooting, Bratton says:http://t.co/HcF0JrCXlm
— DNAinfo.com New York (@DNAinfo) November 21, 2014
— DNAinfo.com New York (@DNAinfo) November 21, 2014
— Nicholas Rizzi (@nickr15) November 21, 2014
Based on the evidence and the police commissioner’s statements, Gurley was killed for no other reason than being a black man walking up some stairs in a building that had recently witnessed crimes. A nervous police officer had his gun out and as soon as he encountered Gurley, the officer shot first without hesitation. Due to this natural inclination to be prepared to shoot at a moment’s notice, a totally innocent man is dead.
While this may just be an unfortunate “circumstance of events,” it further validates the feeling among the black community that people of color are unfairly treated and targeted by law enforcement. In a September article, Mother Jones provided data from the CDC showing that over the past 40 years, blacks have been four times more likely to be shot and killed by law enforcement than whites. While that disparity shrank last decade, Mother Jones also revealed that over the same time period, the FBI’s stats still showed a 4-to-1 disparity in the rate of justifiable homicides between the two races.
President Obama expands U.S. role in Afghanistan, GOP-led committee concludes Benghazi investigation, and more
1. Obama quietly approves expanded U.S. role in Afghanistan
Over the past few weeks, President Barack Obama reportedly gave the go-ahead on new guidelinesfor U.S. missions in Afghanistan. The new orders will not affect the number of U.S. troops stationed in the country — total American forces in Afghanistan are expected to be lowered to 9,800 by the end of 2014 — but they will impact the scope of the remaining troops’ missions. Previous plans had limited troops to counterterrorism missions against al-Qaida, but the new guidelines will allow U.S. forces to provide air support to Afghan operations and target Taliban members who “directly threaten the United States.” [The Associated Press]
2. GOP-led panel finds no intelligence failure in Benghazi attacks
A Republican-led House Intelligence Committee concluded that both the CIA and U.S. military carried out appropriate responses to the 2012 attack on U.S. diplomatic quarters in Benghazi, Libya. While the committee did find that initial assessments on the motives behind the attack, along with the identity of the militants, resulted in “flawed” talking points by then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice, the overall findings agreed with the Obama administration’s description of events. [The Washington Post]
3. Thailand’s justice minister: Martial law to continue ‘indefinitely’
Saying that martial law is “necessary” for the government and junta, Thai Justice Minister GeneralPaiboon Koomchaya said on Friday that Thailand will not lift it for the foreseeable future. The army imposed marital law nationwide following a military coup in May. All political protests are banned under the law, although some demonstrators have tested that. “We are not saying that martial law will stay in place for 50 years, no this is not it, we just ask that it remain in place for now, indefinitely,” Paiboon said. [Reuters]
4. Rookie police officer fatally shoots unarmed Brooklyn man
A New York City police officer who had been on the force for less than 18 months fatally shot an unarmed Brooklyn man on Thursday night. Mayor Bill de Blasio and Police Commissioner William Bratton called the shooting an accident during a press conference on Friday. Officer Peter Liang reportedly drew his flashlight and gun while patrolling the Louis H. Pink Houses in East New York with his partner. The two were walking down an unlit stairwell when Akai Gurley, 28, and his girlfriend, Melissa Butler, 27, entered the stairwell a floor below. Bratton says Liang’s weapon accidentally discharged at that time, and a single bullet struck Gurley in the chest. [The New York Times]
5. Republicans officially file a lawsuit over ObamaCare
House Republicans filed a lawsuit against the secretaries of the Health and Human Services and Treasury Departments on Friday. The suit accuses the Obama administration of “unlawfully postponing a requirement that larger employers offer health coverage to their full-time employees or pay penalties.” The White House originally deferred the requirement until 2015, and then delayed it until 2016 for employers with 50 to 99 employees. [The New York Times]
6. U.S. stock markets see fifth-straight week of gains
The U.S. stock market closed out its fifth week of positive performance — its best stretch since 2011— on Friday. The People’s Bank of China announced an interest rate cut on Friday that nudged international markets higher, while the European Central Bank’s president, Mario Draghi, made comments about the bank’s plans to double down on boosting the eurozone economy. “It’s short-term good news, but the really good news is going to take longer to play out,” Tom Kolefas, of TIAA-CREF, said. “What we really need is real economic growth (outside the U.S.).” [Fortune, The Wall Street Journal]
7. Global study qualifies violence against women as ‘epidemic’
A five-part series of studies presented in medical journal The Lancet reports that violence against women is a “global public health and clinical problem of epidemic proportions.” Entitled “Violence Against Women and Girls,” the series reports that 100-140 million women have undergone female genital mutilation, 7 percent of women will be sexually assaulted in their lifetimes, and 70 million girls are married before turning 18 years old. The study’s authors said one problem is that much of the research and education on violence against women takes place almost exclusively in high-income countries. [Time]
8. Hackers attack websites supporting Hong Kong Occupy Central protests
Apple Daily and PopVote, two independent news sites which have been covering and supporting Hong Kong’s Occupy Central protests, are being “bombarded by attacks of unprecedented size.” The cyberattacks are “larger than any attack we’ve ever seen,” Matthew Prince, CEO of Cloudfare, a company that protects websites from distributed denial of service attacks, said. The identify of the hackers remains unclear, although it’s likely the individual or group is against Hong Kong’s pro-democracy movement. [Forbes, The International Business Times]
9. Aereo files for bankruptcy following Supreme Court ruling
Streaming serviced Aereo announced in a statement on Friday that it is filing for bankruptcy. The Supreme Court ruled in the summer with Fox and CBS networks, which said that by allowing subscribers to view TV stations via the internet, Aereo was violating their copyright. “The U.S. Supreme Court decision effectively changed the laws that had governed Aereo’s technology, creating regulatory and legal uncertainty,” Chet Kanojia, the company’s CEO, said. “Without that clarity, the challenges have proven too difficult to overcome.” [NPR]
10. New study finds most heavy drinkers are not alcoholics
A survey of 138,100 adults in the United States found that nine out of 10 people who drink too much are not alcoholics, and they could imbibe less with some encouragement. For men, five or more drinks on one occasion, or 15 drinks or more in a week qualifies as excessive drinking; for women, four per sitting, or eight drinks or more in a week qualifies. While about 29 percent of the population does drink excessively, 90 percent of those individuals do not fit the definition of an alcoholic. “We need to think about other strategies to address these people who are drinking too much,” Dr. Robert Brewer of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said. [The New York Times]
I’m concerned about the Bulls**t factor that politicians have served to it’s constituents since the beginning of this Republic.
House Speaker Boehner seems especially adept at this factor even better than most. When will Americans wake up and see they’re being duped over and over again. I favor no one party in this assessment. They are all the same when it comes to the Bulls**t factor.
House Republicans filed a long-awaited lawsuit against the Obama administration on Friday, arguing that the president has inappropriately acted without congressional authority to implement parts of the health care reform law. If it’s successful, the lawsuit could increase out-of-pocket costs for millions of vulnerable Americans who already struggle to afford health services — even though the GOP has repeatedly accused the law of making coverage too expensive.
According to the legal challenge, the White House shouldn’t have acted unilaterally to delay the employer mandate portion of the Affordable Care Act. But it also takes issue with a different provision of the law: subsidies known as cost-sharing reductions, which cap the amount that insurers are allowed to charge people for co-pays, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket expenses.
Over the next ten years, the ACA will give an estimated $175 billion in subsidies to insurance companies to keep health costs lower for Americans earning between 100 and 250 percent of the federal poverty line. House Republicans are arguing that money was illegally appropriated without getting approval from Congress.
If insurers no longer receive subsidies from the government to offset the cost of capping out-of-pocket costs, however, the New York Times reports that “the companies might be forced to raise costs elsewhere.” That could directly affect out-of-pocket expenses among a population that already worries about being able to afford insurance.
GOP lawmakers are setting their sets on repealing this particular consumer protection despite the fact that they’ve have previously had a lot of complaints about the health lawraising out-of-pocket costs, arguing Obamacare threatens to make coverage too unaffordable for average Americans.
In advance of the law’s first enrollment period, Republicans were quick to criticize the other expenses accompanying new Obamacare plans aside from the monthly premiums, saying the deductibles were much too high. At the time, the Senate Republican Communications Center circulated a roundup of consumers complaining about their deductibles.
In April, House Speaker John Boeher (R-OH) complained that Obamacare has caused his co-pays and deductibles to triple, and said he’s been getting letters from his constituents having similar issues. In the lead up to the recent midterm elections, Republicans in close races relied on the messaging that the health law was driving up co-pays and deductibles. Candidates like incoming Sen. Jodi Ernst (IA) argued that the Obama administration was hiding the “true cost” of out-of-pocket expenses from enrollees.
“The House has an obligation to stand up for the Constitution, and that is exactly why we are pursuing this course of action,” Boehner said in a statement after the lawsuit was filed. But if he gets his way, the House GOP might also end up fueling its own complaints about the law.
Hillary Clinton has been crowned by many as the presumptive Democratic nominee for 2016, but there are other Democratic hopefuls out there. On Thursday one of them became the first potential candidate to form an exploratory committee, the first step in the long run for the presidency.
That man is former Virginia Senator Jim Webb. You may remember him as the guy who served one term in Senate between 2007 and 2013, and chose not to seek re-election. Webb served in the Reagan administration as Secretary of the Navy but ran as a Democrat for senate in 2006. In his announcement video, Webb highlighted his bipartisan roots, his military history, and made a generally centrist argument as to why he is considering a run for the presidency. Here are a few more things you should know about Jim Webb, the guy who has officially kicked off the 2016 Presidential elections.
1. Webb is not a dove.
Webb opposed the Iraq War from the beginning. His stance on the issue has led to many people calling him a dove-ish democrat, but that characterization is not all that clear. Webb did not oppose the war in Iraq on humanitarian grounds, but rather because he believed it was a strategic error, arguing that the conflict would sap vital resources from military engagements in other parts of the world and strengthen Iran. “I am not against fighting when fighting is necessary,” he told Inside the Navy at the time. “What I am for is making sure you are fighting the right war.” A Vietnam veteran, Webb famously said in 2007 he still believed that the Vietnam War was a good idea, and partially blamed the “anti-war left” for the way things turned out. In his announcement video, he speaks vaguely of “ill-considered foreign ventures that have drained trillions from our economy and in some cases brought instability instead of deterrence,” but doesn’t name names. Webb was opposed to military intervention in Libya.
2. Webb only recently evolved to support marriage-equality.
Webb was against same-sex marriage during his time in the Senate, although he wasopposed to a Virginia constitutional amendment that defined marriage as being between a man and a woman. Last month he told The Richmond Times that he was “comfortable with the evolution” the issue has seen over the past few years. “I think it has been a good thing for this country,” he said. Webb also voted to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell after having campaigned against it.
3. Webb didn’t want the EPA to regulate greenhouse gasses.
Webb has been less than progressive on the issue of climate change. In 2011, he voted for a bill that would’ve halted the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to regulate greenhouse gasses. He is a proponent of the Keystone pipeline and even called on Obama to open Virginia’s coast to oil and natural gas exploration.
4.Webb is big on prison reform.
If Webb for President is a long shot, at least his candidacy can serve to bring the important yet rarely discussed issue of prison reform into the spotlight. Webb is outspoken on the issue and introduced legislation in the senate that would’ve created a commission to recommend widespread reforms to the criminal justice system. The bill hoped to remedy racial disparities within the system, address the fact that there are four times as many mentally ill people in prisons than in mental hospitals, and probe into the causes of the U.S.’s extremely high incarceration rate. The bill had unanimous Democratic support but was filibustered by Republicans and did not pass.
And there you have it. The 2016 elections have officially begun.
President Obama is taking executive action to protect millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation.
His plan has been a tough sell to the American people, especially with the new Republican-controlled Congress. But many experts agree that some of the arguments against immigration are based on misguided information.
Here are 5 myths about undocumented immigrants, and why they’re wrong.
Myth # 1: They don’t pay taxes
Undocumented immigrants are already U.S. taxpayers.
Collectively, they paid an estimated $10.6 billion to state and local taxes in 2010, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), a research organization that works on tax policy issues. Contributions varied by state. In Montana they contributed $2 million. In California, more than $2.2 billion. On average they pay about 6.4% of their income in state and local taxes, ITEP said.
A 2007 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report on the impact of undocumented immigrants on the budgets of local and state governments cited IRS figures showing that 50% to 75% of the about 11 million unauthorized U.S. immigrants file and pay income taxes each year.
A 2013 CBO analysis of the failed bipartisan bill introduced by the so-called “gang of 8″ that would have created a path to legal status for many undocumented immigrants found that increasing legal immigration would increase government spending on refundable tax credits, Medicaid and health insurance subsidies, among other federal benefits. But it would also create even more tax revenue by way of income and payroll taxes. That could reduce deficits by $175 billion over the first 10 years and by at least $700 billion in the second decade.
ITEP estimates that allowing certain immigrants to stay in the country and work legally would boost state and local tax contributions by $2 billion a year.
Myth # 2: They don’t pay into Social Security
The truth is that undocumented immigrants contribute more in payroll taxes than they will ever consume in public benefits.
Take Social Security. According to the Social Security Administration (SSA), unauthorized immigrants — who are not eligible to receive Social Security benefits — have paid an eye-popping $100 billion into the fund over the past decade.
“They are paying an estimated $15 billion a year into Social Security with no intention of ever collecting benefits,” Stephen Goss, chief actuary of the SSA told CNNMoney. “Without the estimated 3.1 million undocumented immigrants paying into the system, Social Security would have entered persistent shortfall of tax revenue to cover payouts starting in 2009,” he said.
As the baby boom generation ages and retires, immigrant workers are key to shoring up Social Security and counteracting the effects of the decline in U.S.-born workers paying into the system, Goss said.
Without immigrants, the Social Security Board of Trustees projects that the system will no longer be able to pay the full promised benefits by 2037.
Myth #3: They drain the system
Undocumented immigrants do not qualify for welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, and most other public benefits. Most of these programs require proof of legal immigration status and under the 1996 welfare law, even legal immigrants cannot receive these benefits until they have been in the United States for more than five years.
Non-citizen immigrant adults and children are about 25% less likely to be signed up for Medicaid than their poor native-born equivalents and are also 37% less likely to receive food stamps, according to a 2013 study by the Cato Institute.
Citizen children of illegal immigrants — often derogatorily referred to as “anchor babies” — do qualify for social benefits. Also, undocumented immigrants are eligible for schooling and emergency medical care. Currently, the average unlawful immigrant household costs taxpayers $14,387 per household, according to a recent report by The Heritage Foundation. But in its 2013 “Immigration Myths and Facts” report, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says most economists see providing these benefits as an investment for the future, when these children become workers and taxpayers.
A CBO report on the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 concluded that a path to legalization for immigrants would increase federal revenues by $48 billion. Such a plan would see $23 billion in increased costs from the use of public services, but ultimately, it would produce a surplus of $25 billion for government coffers, CBO said.
Myth # 4: They take American jobs
The American economy needs immigrant workers.
The belief that immigrants take jobs that can otherwise be filled by hard-working Americans has been disputed by an overwhelming number of economic research studies and data.
Removing the approximately 8 million unauthorized workers in the United States would not automatically create 8 million job openings for unemployed Americans, said Daniel Griswold, director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Trade Policy Studies, in his 2011 testimony before the House Judiciary Sub-committee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement.
The reason, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, is two-fold. For one, removing millions of undocumented workers from the economy would also remove millions of entrepreneurs, consumers and taxpayers. The economy would actually lose jobs. Second, native-born workers and immigrant workers tend to possess different skills that often complement one another.
According to Griswold, immigrants, regardless of status, fill the growing gap between expanding low-skilled jobs and the shrinking pool of native-born Americans who are willing to take such jobs. By facilitating the growth of such sectors as retail, agriculture, landscaping, restaurants, and hotels, low-skilled immigrants have enabled those sectors to expand, attract investment, and create middle-class jobs in management, design and engineering, bookkeeping, marketing and other areas that employ U.S. citizens.
America’s unions support the president’s executive action. “For far too long, our broken immigration system has allowed employers to drive down wages and working conditions in our country,” the AFL-CIO says on its website. “The brunt of the impact has been born by immigrant workers, who face the highest rates of wage theft, sexual harassment, and death and injury on the job.”
Myth # 5: It’s just a matter of following the law
Many Americans want immigrants to enter the country legally.
But under current immigration laws, there are very few options for legal immigration, the costs are increasingly prohibitive and the wait for any kind of status can be long and frustrating.
According to the State Department, that imaginary “immigration line” is already 4.4 million people long and depending on the type of visa sought and the country of origin, the wait can be years to decades long. In some countries, such as the Philippines and Mexico people have been waiting over 20 years for approval of a family-sponsored visa.
Immigrants can legally get to the U.S by being sponsored by an employer or a family member, they can enter the country as refugees, or they could receive one of the selectively distributed professional or diversity visas. The Diversity Visa Program makes 55,000 green cards available to persons from countries with low rates of immigration to the U.S.
According to the State Department, the fees to obtain permanent U.S. visas can range from $200 to over $700, excluding legal fees. Plus, there are visa quotas which limits immigration from any given country.
In many poor, violence-ridden countries, or in cases where parents are separated from their children, immigrants say the wait is unbearable, leaving many to resort to illegal border crossing.
That journey can be expensive and deadly.
Smugglers charge anywhere from $3000 to upwards of $70,000 depending on country of origin, mode of transport and distance travelled according to the Mexican Migration Project, a multidisciplinary research effort between investigators in Mexico and the U.S.
Many don’t make it. According to federal records, more than 6,000 immigrants have died crossing the southern border since 1998
Yes, this stuff still exists.
It mainly exists in the dark corners of the internet where only like minded folks (and some intrepid investigators) know where to go. Then there is Fox Nation’s website which is pretty much in the open for everyone to view or comment…and “comment” they do…
Fox Nation editor and O’Reilly Factor producer Jesse Watters has some ‘splaining to do about the racist, murderous comments we found on Fox Nation about Ferguson protesters. And then tell us again about how black people complaining about racism is “old, tired rhetoric.”
Aria found 42 extremely disturbing comments earlier this week.
Some were on this thread with the inflammatory title, “Rep. John Lewis Calls for ‘Massive, Non-Violent Protests’ Nationwide if Wilson Isn’t Indicted.” This is the same John Lewis that Bill O’Reilly and Bernard Goldberg recently chided for being too civil rights-y.
Even worse were the comments on this thread with the deliberately inflammatory title, “FBI: Ferguson Grand Jury Decision ‘Will Likely’ Lead to Violence.”
From Phone Booths to Hot Spots (Medium)
Roosevelt Institute Fellow Susan Crawford praises a new plan to convert New York City’s pay phones into high-speed wireless hotspots, which she says would help local businesses immensely.
Facebook’s Shuttle Bus Drivers Seek to Unionize (NYT)
Steven Greenhouse reports on the drivers’ reasons for unionizing, which center around their very difficult split-shift schedule and wages that are insufficient for housing near work.
Wall Street is Taking Over America’s Pension Plans (The Intercept)
Murtaza Hussain calls Wall Street’s funding campaigns in hopes of shifting public pensions to investments that build their profits “the biggest financial story of our generation that you’ve never heard of.”
Congress Must Not Let Wind Energy Jobs Blow Away (The Hill)
Michael Brune and Leo W. Gerard call for the renewal of the Wind Production Tax Credit, arguing that wind power isn’t just better for the environment, but also has the potential to create thousands of jobs.
Fed’s Dudley Sees Loss of Trust in Banks as Threat to Stability (WSJ)
Senate testimony from the President of the New York Federal Reserve argues that there is a case to be made for splitting up the big banks even now, writes Pedro da Costa.
This is an interesting and fact-filled article about “welfare queens” and welfare statistics…
Ever since Ronald Reagan introduced America to the “Welfare Queen,” the right wing has milked that myth for all its racist worth. Never mind the fact that the majority of people in this country that receive food stamps or “welfare” are actually white – everyone just “knows” that black people are living the high life on white people’s tax dollars!
For instance, here’s the headline and text at Youngcons.com:
Obama’s America: Young woman has been on welfare for 12 years, what she says about finding a job will INFURIATE you
The woman in the video, Kiara, is 30 years old and has proudly been on welfare for 12 years. She has four kids and no plans to make better life decisions in the future. So for those who say America doesn’t have an entitlement mentality problem:
Also, isn’t it great when welfare recipients like Kiara have tattoos, manicures and fancy purses? The truth is, she’s perfectly capable of taking care of herself, but she doesn’t want to. The taxpayers are the suckers and will continue to pay for her bad decisions. Obama’s America.
I’m just going to leave this here.
GASP! $780 a month in food stamps! $500 a month in TANF (welfare)! That’s $1280 a month! That’s too much money for this lazy parasite! My god, that comes out to a whopping $15,360 a year!
Wait. What? $15,360 a year?! With four kids? But I thought she was living the high life on the tax payer’s dime? And why am I supposed to freak out over $15,360 a year when Wall Street is regularly caught ripping off the taxpayer for millions of dollars every month? There’s a whole lot of information and context being left out of this “outrageous” story but that’s OK, the point was clearly just to show a black woman with multiple kids and no job living on welfare.
And yet, I could find the same exact story but with a white woman and conservatives wouldn’t care one whit. You see, it’s only bad when blacks live on welfare and have too many kids. As far as conservatives are concerned, white people worked for these benefits (even if they haven’t) and blacks are just parasites. But don’t you call them racist!
So what if the majority of food stamp and welfare recipients are white conservatives? Who cares about those little details? There’s gullible white people to rile up so they can blame Obama! Curse you, Obama, for all this welfare abuse!
Why “gullible” you say? How else do describe people angry at Obama for something that started under Bush? Remember, “Kiara” here says she’s been jobless for 12 years. Doing a bit of simple math (an almost impossible task for rage-drunk conservatives), that would mean this story started in 2001 (the video is from 2013). If I recall correctly, that was a Republican president, a Republican Senate and a Republican House. Why didn’t they stop “Kiara” from her life of immorality?
Then again, since Republicans expended a huge amount of effort to prevent women like “Kiara” from learning about safe sex and contraceptives, one could just as easily say that her tendency to get knocked up is the direct responsibility of Republicans. Of course, I have no doubt that the “Youngcons” would whine about how totally unfair I’m being.
But, you know, blaming Obama is completely fair because he’s black or something.
Even more amusing, if I were to suggest that we provide “Kiara” with free birth control (so she’ll stop having kids), job training (so she has a marketable skill) and free child care (so she could get a job and not spend every penny on a babysitter), conservatives would scream bloody murder. Because in Republican America, the best way to break the cycle of dependence is to throw people into the street and see what happens. Never mind that her four kids would be homeless, hungry and lack basic healthcare, it’s about stopping welfare abuse, dammit! Punishing “Kiara” is far more important than ensuring her four kids have a roof over their heads and food on the table!
After all, they’re not fetuses anymore so gives a crap about them?