A Response To A Mad Liberal

[ComerPerro]

This isn't me, but I am posting it for the benifit of one of our frequent readers who, because he doesn't want to get addicted, won't sign up. I tell him to, but oh well...

Anyway, seems he got himself into an email war with conservative crackpot Dutch Martin after reading one of his right-wing rants.

It seems our friend's emails so disturbed Mr. Martin that he was compelled to write not one, but two articles about him. I believe the working title a few days ago was "Angry Liberal"...

http://www.therightreport.com/articles/DMartin/martin010504.htm

and part 2

http://www.therightreport.com/articles/DMartin/martin010704.htm


I will spare you the text of the articles, but check the links because they are hilarious, I assure you. It reads like your typical, arrogant, twisting words right-wing rant in a classic Bill OReilley or Sean Hannity style. There are many times where Mr. Martin congratulates himself for being so smart and witty.

Also, here is Jacob's actual email:

Dear Mr. Martin,

I just felt that I had to make some comments about your interview with Star Parker on December 30th.(http://www.townhall.com/columnists/GuestColumns/Martin20031230.shtml)


Star Parker has admitted that her family was on welfare for 7 years, as you may or not know. How did welfare hurt her? It sure seemed to serve her family fine. She now has a fine job as a mouthpiece for the right-wing faction in this country. And, is this just another situation where a right-winger insists that we do what she says, and not what she does? Your demonization of blacks as lazy people is disgusting, and you should be ashamed of yourself. Additionally,You obviously don't know how much about our Social Security system and how it works. Social Security is not a welfare system, it is a retirement system. People pay a percentage of their paycheck into the system, and get it back later in their later years, in monthly installments. I guess you also think that you got where you are without affirmative action. That's debatable. Same goes for Ms. Parker. Before you bash set-asides and entitlements and welfare, think about what they did for you and Ms. Parker. I don't expect a reply to this, frankly, because most cretins on the right talk a good game but cower when the chips are about to fall. Have a nice night, and I would be MOST delighted if you would reply to this.

Sincerely,
A vile welfare recipient(just kidding!)


Here is Mr. Martin's reply

Dutch Martin wrote:
Jacob,

There's no way I would let your comments slide without a rebuttal, my friend. I believe you have missed the point entirely. It's not that welfare in and of itself is bad, if used as a TEMPORARY means of helping people who are TEMPORARILY down on their luck. The problem is that under LBJ, welfare became a PERMANENT ENTITLEMENT PROGRAM, which gave many weak-minded, undriven and lazy people in the lower class the excuse they needed to REMAIN weak-minded, undriven and lazy. What you need to realize, sir, is that before welfare came along, black Americans worked their butts off to succeed and economically prosper because, basically, we had no other choice. Some people are naturally driven; others are driven out of personal circumstances (i.e. to survive). Under the "War on Poverty" programs of the 1960's, the expansion of welfare provided a temptation to those among us, particularly black folks, least inclined to resist it! As a result, welfare trapped a large chunk of the black community into a three-generation cycle of poverty, dependency, crime, and utter psychological nihilism, a cycle that has only begun to become unraveled with the (thank God!) Welfare Reform Act of 1996.

What you don't understand, Jacob, is that welfare was more than just a check and some food stamps every month; it represented a sick, self-defeating mentality and lifestyle that did more harm to African-Americans than slavery, Jim Crow, police water hoses and attack dogs, white teachers refusing to call on black pupils in class, or racial profiling EVER could - COMBINED! Welfare dependency resulted in a spiritual and moral collapse in the black community from which we are STILL RECOVERING!

In fact, there have been many studies done (e.g. check out the Cato Institute) that show that in many states, welfare on average paid more than an entry-level job. Those who chose welfare over work knew this; they weren't stupid. Furthermore, Parker's family may have been on welfare for 7 seven years - that implies that they eventually GOT OFF THE DOLE!

Regarding your comment about Social Security, for your information I am well aware of how social security works. In Uncle Sam's Plantation, Ms. Parker suggests how it can be IMPROVED (via privatization), and how IMPROVING social security will benefit in the long run ALL AMERICANS WHO PAY INTO IT!

Regarding your assertion that I and Ms. Parker have been helped in our lives by affirmative action (I assume you mean racial preferences, right?), I can't speak for Ms. Parker. However, as for me, I can tell you this: even in the absence of race-based affirmative action, I would still be where I am today. Why? Because I was blessed with a mother who was wise enough to teach me the value of hard work and education at an early age. These early lessons enabled this poor boy from Cleveland to become the first black male VALEDICTORIAN of his high school class, his family's FIRST COLLEGE GRADUATE, earn a MASTER'S DEGREE, and ultimately become a U.S. diplomat.

Furthermore, although my family may have been on welfare when I was a child, my mother worked her ass off to make sure that I would not repeat the cycle! She didn't want her youngest child to be a slave to a system under which my family suffered for far too long, which is exactly why she was strict with me when it came to my schoolwork. She knew first-hand the psychological effects of living on a system, especially given the fact that my father went out of his way NOT to be in my life. My mother didn't want her child (or ANY of her children for that matter) to be "welfare cases." She wanted me to BE BETTER THAN THAT - AND I AM!

I didn't get to where I am today because of the color of my skin; I got here because (surprise!) I EARNED IT!

Not bad for a "cretin on the right," huh...?

The ball's in your court, sir.

Dutch Martin



And here is the Rebuttal




Dear Dutch,

Thanks for taking some time out of what I'm sure is a busy schedule to rebut some of my points. Let's look at them one by one.

The first point that I believe you are trying to make is that anyone who wants to get off welfare can just get a job. A lot of welfare recipients DO work, and they DO so because AFDC benefits are not all that great, surely not as great as you say they are. There is discrimination in the workplace, a shortage in the affordable child care market, and these factors can make it hard for single women to just get up and start working. A large percentage of AFDC and food stamp recipients are children. Children can't exactly work, Dutch. At least, not legally.

Here are some additional points that I think are important:

Welfare programs are only about 1% of the total federal budget, hardly a big chunk. It's certainly not as big as our defense budget, which can sometimes approach 25-30% of the budget.

People don't stay on welfare forever, especially now, considering the "welfare reform"(and I use that term very loosely) of the 90s. The average is around 2 years. Maybe until a child is old enough to be in school during the day, so Mom can actually get a job?

Let's look at some more common welfare myths:

I got these from this site - http://www.benchmarkinstitute.org/t_by_t/pb/welfare_myths.pdf

"Myth #1- Families stay on welfare for a long time and don't make any attempt to get off.
Fact- Less than half of AFDC families receive it for more than 36 months overall and most receive it for no more than two years at a time.

Another myth you hinted at is the myth that people become dependent on welfare simply because it's there. Not true.

You also said that welfare typically pays more in benefits than an average entry-level job. While I don't have enough information to rebut this accurately, this site does point out that whatever welfare pays in any state, it is not enough to support a family.

On to social security. You hedged. Ms. Parker did list social security as one of the various welfare programs and this is typical. The right wing dearly wants to privatize this program and turn it over to Wall Street to tinker with. The whole point of Social Security is a guaranteed retirement benefit. Why risk having recipients benefits hurt because their portfolio sucked? Notwithstanding the fact that Franklin Delano Roosevelt made a promise to senior citizens when he created the Social Security program. A promise that when they were old enough to retire, money would be provided for them to live off of. FDR did not have a loophole in the bill that said "in the event of a Republican takeover of Congress, privatization should most certainly be enacted." Nope, wasn't in there. Ask 10 senior citizens what they think of proposals to privatize social security. Most won't be very receptive to the privatization ideas.

Regarding my assertion that Starr Parker and you have been helped by affirmative action programs, why shouldn't I stand by it? The whole purpose of affirmative action is to help minorities, and both of you are minorities. It was not a jab as you may have thought, but simply a fact. I don't begrudge you for it, because I am a staunch supporter of affirmative action(even though I am a white, Jewish male so I don't benefit from it, I'll add).
I find it to be very disconcerting that someone who benefited from affirmative action can oppose it, it just doesn't make sense. Why wouldn't you want other african-americans to have the same opportunities that you have had?

You can say that you were not helped by affirmative action, but look at Clarence Thomas, for example. He's a pretty smart guy, I'll concede that. But, I, along with a lot of other people, believe that he was appointed to the Supreme Court because he was an African-American. He had almost no judicial experience, only a year or so on the D.C. Circuit Court. How ironic that a Republican president(who opposed affirmative action) appointed him. Look at Bush's cabinet. He nominated Colin Powell to be Secretary of State, and Colin is a known supporter of affirmative action. He has acknowledged how affirmative action has helped him, and Colin is a real success story. He is one of the few Republicans I can stand, and I have a great deal of respect for him.

Affirmative action is not a program to favor African-Americans(and other minorities) over others, but simply a program to level the playing fields. I don't think it is fair for someone like yourself who benefited from welfare and affirmative action to denounce these programs and deny access to many other deserving minorities.

Like I said above, I don't have a stake in affirmative action. Not a direct stake, at least. But maybe we all have some stake in it, and that is to see a society free of discrimination based on race, among other characteristics. Affirmative action can help achieve this, and help fix the growing gap between rich and poor. African-Americans would be helped immensely by that particular achievement because, as you probably know, the median income for blacks is quite a bit lower than the median income for whites.

As for calling you a cretin, maybe that was too harsh :). I apologize. Sometimes I let the ad hominem attacks get a little out of hand when talking with Republicans. I hope I have answered most of your points, and that you enjoy my responses.

If you want to discuss this further, either e-mail me or maybe we can talk some other way. If you have any of the instant messaging services, we could talk on one of those, for example, if you want to give me your screen name on one of them. That would be a lot more convenient for me, considering this e-mail has taken me a fair amount of time to write, and I'm sure your response took you a fair amount of time to write. I appreciate you taking the time. And please excuse my shitty formatting and paragraph structure, I've had a long day and didn't want to take the time. I tried to keep the spelling errors to a minimum. Have a nice night/morning.

Yours Truly,
Jacob



And now, if you are still reading, ComerPerro's take on this:

I thought this exchange was funny as hell, and I thought that the fact that Mr. Martin was inspired to write not one, but two articles on this exchange was the icing on the cake.

As Jacob put it: "I could write better articles than this guy, and he's got a fucking Master's Degree."

Thanks for reading

[wtmusic]

1. Intelligent response

They hate that, don't they! :silly:

[ComerPerro]

2. Nothing pisses of a rightwinger more

Than a coherent thesis written in an articulate manner and supported by facts.

[Melodybe]

4. Props to you, I bet that he will actually have to think about his position

on affirmative action, heck with a rebuttal like that you may have actually changed his mind. Good for you, would you mind writing Rush or O'Lielly they could really use some talkin' to.

[DoctorMyEyes]

3. self loathing

The problem is that under LBJ, welfare became a PERMANENT ENTITLEMENT PROGRAM, which gave many weak-minded, undriven and lazy people in the lower class the excuse they needed to REMAIN weak-minded, undriven and lazy......Under the "War on Poverty" programs of the 1960's, the expansion of welfare provided a temptation to those among us, particularly black folks, least inclined to resist it!

So "black folks" are the "particularly" "weak-minded, undriven and lazy people in the lower class"?