Republicans accuse HHS of gutting welfare reform with quiet policy change

July 13, 2012
Fox News



Republicans are accusing the Obama administration of unilaterally gutting welfare reform after the Department of Health and Human Services quietly notified states that they may seek a waiver for the program's strict work requirements.

HHS made the announcement in a policy memo Thursday, news that slipped well below the radar amid a raucous day on the presidential campaign trail. But a few prominent GOP lawmakers on Capitol Hill picked up on the change, and accused the administration of overhauling one of the most important bipartisan agreements of the past several decades.

"President Obama just tore up a basic foundation of the welfare contract" Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, D-Ohio, said in a statement. He also called the move a "blatant violation of the law."

Mitt Romney on Friday spoke up on the change, saying: "President Obama now wants to strip the established work requirements from welfare." He said "the linkage of work and welfare is essential to prevent welfare from becoming a way of life."

How exactly the HHS change will play out is unclear. In Thursday's policy directive, the department said the states may seek a waiver from the work component of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program, in order to "test alternative and innovative strategies, policies and procedures that are designed to improve employment outcomes for needy families."

HHS stressed that any alternative should still aim to get welfare recipients into gainful employment. Any plan that "appears substantially likely to reduce access to assistance or employment for needy families," will not be approved, the memo said.

But HHS is suddenly allowing for more flexibility in a program known -- and in many circles, lauded -- for its rigid framework. Currently, states have to have 50 percent of their caseload meet certain work participation requirements, though there are ways around that as many states fall short.

The latest department directive suggested alternative plans could "combine learning and work" to fulfill the work requirement, or let "vocational educational training or job search /readiness programs" count as well.

The hard-fought welfare reform agreement in 1996 was struck between the Bill Clinton administration and a Republican-led Congress. It is still considered a signature legislative achievement from that period.

The number of people on TANF has decreased dramatically since 1997, but roughly 4 million people are still enrolled according to federal figures. The change comes in the middle of a competitive election fight between Obama and Romney.

Rep. Dave Camp, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, have written to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius asking for a more detailed explanation of the change and her authority for making it. Both expressed concern that the change would strip the crux of the 1996 welfare reform deal.

"This ends welfare reform as we know it," Camp said in a statement.

"I'm disappointed that after years of sitting on their hands and failing to propose any significant improvements to the TANF programs, the Obama Administration is once again over-stepping their authority and attempting to circumvent Congress through an unprecedented bypass of the legislative process," Hatch said.

Mark Levin: Picking Condi Rice for VP is bad politics and a bad idea

July 12, 2012

Obama‘s Relationship With Communist Frank Marshall Davis From Dinesh D’Souza‘s ’2016′ Film

July 12, 2012
The Blaze

Exclusive: See This Clip About Obama‘s Relationship With Communist Frank Marshall Davis From Dinesh D’Souza‘s ’2016′ Film

Americans no longer trust their country

Trust Is a Two-Way Street: Beck Gives What Could Be The Most Powerful Oval Office Speech Yet

The Man Is a Liar...Barack Obama

July 11, 2012
American Thinker
By William L. Gensert

The man is a liar. Every time Barack Obama gives a speech or makes a statement and then turns to walk away from the podium, I expect to see another set of lips on the back of his head, flapping out the opposite of whatever the front of him just finished blabbing.

It's not a tax, it is a tax, it's not a tax. Not only does it make you dizzy, but you have to wonder if Obama thinks America comprises complete morons and nothing else. With respect to anyone who still believes a word out of his mouth, I would agree with him: those rarified few are certainly morons, or at the very least delusional and perhaps in need of intensive medication therapy -- or as the famous black racist Charles Barron would say, at least a good "slap" -- if only for our collective sanity. Oh, and I would remove Barron's requirement that the person being slapped be white. After all, it's possible for anyone to be an Obama sycophant. Delusion is colorblind.

With Chief Justice Roberts' contortions at creating constitutionality in support of ObamaCare, you would think that in victory our president would at least accept the terms of surrender. But even that is a bridge too far for the Punahou dissembler.

He rejoices in the affirmation of ObamaCare as constitutional on the basis of the power of congress to tax, and then turns around and says the ObamaCare mandate is still not a tax.

But then, the man is a serious, serial dissimulator -- examples of the storyteller's stories abound.

"If you like your doctor or health care plan, you can keep it."

We have all seen how that's turned out. I'm sorry, but doesn't this guy read prepared text from a teleprompter? He makes my doctor sound like a puppy. "Can I keep it, Barack? Please?"

"Since I've been president, federal spending has risen at the lowest pace in nearly 60 years."

Well...I guess adding $5 trillion to an already $10-trillion national debt in less than four years is merely responsible stewardship and not excessive. In any case, what does "lowest pace" mean? Can you have a low pace? Who is writing this stuff for him? Barack, I'm available...but no, I would just make you sound like an idiot, and you certainly don't need any help with that.

"And then you got their plan, which is let's have dirtier air, dirtier water, less people with health insurance."

Yes, that's it: people who disagree with your policies want dirtier air and water...and I would have said "fewer" people and "then you have their plan," but I'm not a genius like Barack.

"I'm pledging to cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term in office."

He has run deficits in excess of a trillion dollars in each of his years in office, while proposing budgets, which failed to garner a single vote two years in a row, including-trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see.

In 2007, the last year the House of Representatives and the Senate were under Republican control, the deficit was $161 billion. Who would have thought at the time that this was a high point, or something to aspire to?

Also, I probably would have said "in half before the end of my first term."

I know I'm just being petty, and with my grammar and syntax, who am I to throw stones? But it is so much fun after eight years of disquisitions on the dumbness of George W. Bush to now hear the most brilliant man to ever walk the face of the earth -- if you don't believe me, just ask him -- speak as if he is a tad simple, assuredly undeserving of his previous post as president of the Harvard Law Review.

My experience has been that speaking and writing correctly is a requirement of being an editor and a president...of anything, especially these Untied States of America. Perhaps Harvard lowered the bar for a man who, even then, was so obviously the epochal intellect of his era.

I could go on and on, but there are so many lies and only so much space. Besides, every time I list

another falsehood, a bell rings in my head and an angel gets his wings...see, this stuff makes me crazy.

He's the Humpty Dumpty of politics -- words mean exactly what he says they mean, nothing more and nothing less. I don't know about you, but right about now, I would dearly love a shot at cracking Humpty Dumpty's shell of lies. Then I would tell all the king's horses and all the king's men not to bother trying to put the pieces back together again, because the result will certainly be less than the sum of its parts.

What Barack Obama has done in three and a half years of his presidency is cut Americans off from promise. The promise of a better life was always a given in the pre-Barack era. But since his ascendency, the possibility of improving one's lot has been replaced with the realization that at best, we are all hoping to not suffer too much as we sink deeper into the Obama morass.

All this he has done with self-serving hubris in pursuit of his dream of a transcendent legacy. He wants his name emblazoned in the history books as the man who did...whatever...as long as it's there. And if people are not happy with the results, then too bad for them -- they don't count anyway when compared to who he is.

You see, what Obama has attempted to do is to destroy America's spirit. How else would we ever accept him as our savior? But what he will eventually find out, whether on this November 6 or four years later, is that Americans are a special lot. And when I say Americans, I mean anyone who stands up and says that he is American. I don't care where you were born or when you came here, or, as Barack Obama is fond of saying, "what you look like." We are tough and resilient; we will survive this most awful of presidents and keep the American dream alive -- as the last best hope for humanity.

Barack Obama may not know it yet, but he will never be more than a footnote in the saga of history's most open, most prosperous, and most successful experiment with freedom and liberty.

Obama may envision a legacy laden with accolades and accomplishment, but he will never be more than a demagogue -- who was lying to a nation and himself when he thought he was bigger than the dream.

New documentary explores President Obama's past

Mark Levin: Obama re-election would be ‘national suicide’

Solar Cooking Oven

The balkanized States of America?

Cuckoo Thinking...Pretzel Logic

The Socialization Of America Is Economically Impossible

"A country that feels the need to socialize has, in my view, already failed culturally. It is an open admission by the public that they are unwilling or unable to take responsibility for their own prosperity."

July 5, 2012
Alt-Market.com
By Brandon Smith

I understand the dream of the common socialist. I was, after all, once a Democrat. I understand the disparity created in our society by corporatism (not capitalism, though some foolish socialists see them as exactly the same). I understand the drive and the desire to help other human beings, especially those in dire need, and the tendency to see government as the ultimate solution to all our problems. That said, let’s be honest; government is in the end just a tool used by one group or another to implement a particular methodology or set of principles. Unfortunately, what most socialists today don’t seem to understand is that no matter what strategies they devise, they will NEVER have control. And, those they wish to help will be led to suffer, because the establishment does not care about them, or you. The establishment does not think of what it can give, it thinks about what it can take. Socialism, in the minds of the elites, is a con-game which allows them to quarry the favor of the serfs, and nothing more.

There are other powers at work in this world; powers that have the ability to play both sides of the political spectrum. The money elite have been wielding the false left/right paradigm for centuries, and to great effect. Whether socialism or corporatism prevails, they are the final victors, and the game continues onward…

Knowing this fact, I find that my reactions to the entire Obamacare debate rather muddled. Really, I see the whole event as a kind of circus, a mirage, a distraction. Perhaps it is because I am first and foremost an economic analyst, and when looking at Obamacare and socialization in general, I see no tangibility. I see no threat beyond what we as Americans already face. Let me explain… Read More

FOUNDERS WITHOUT WHOM AMERICA WOULD NOT EXIST

By Chuck Baldwin
July 4, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

As we approach another Independence Day, I think it would be good to remind ourselves of who those men were that counted the cost and paid the price to bring this land of liberty into existence. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans today seem to have very little--if any--knowledge and appreciation for the sacrifices that our Founding Fathers made in order to birth this great country. We can thank the vast majority of our schools (including the institutions of higher learning), major media, political institutions, and even churches for this egregious embarrassment. Accordingly, I think it fitting that today's column will attempt to renew in our hearts the respect and reverence that these great men whom we call Founding Fathers so richly deserve.

George Washington

Called "The Father of His Country," George Washington was, perhaps, the most important man of the founding era. Supernaturally spared during the Indian wars, Washington became the military leader who held the Continental Army together when it was virtually impossible for any man to do so. Without his leadership at Valley Forge and elsewhere, there is absolutely no doubt that the Continental Army would have fallen apart and the fight for independence would have been lost.

Equally significant is the leadership that George Washington demonstrated in the Continental Congress. Without question, Washington was the glue that held the political bodies of the colonies together. Then, add the fact that George Washington was America's first President, whose leadership solidified the colonies into a new United States, and his value to the cause of American independence cannot be in any way overstated.

Think of it: George Washington was the commander-in-chief of the Continental Army. And he led that inferior army to victory over the greatest military force in the world at the time: Great Britain. Afterward, Washington rebuffed a strong effort to inaugurate him as America's king, and led the fledgling nation to embrace republican government instead. Washington presided over the Constitutional Convention that drafted the US Constitution. He was America's first President. Washington's Farewell Address formed the compass and rudder of America for at least the next hundred years and, in my opinion, is the greatest political address ever delivered on American soil. Without George Washington, there would be no America.

Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson was the principal author of America's birth certificate: the Declaration of Independence. In my mind, there is no greater document of liberty ever written by man. When it came to the understanding of human rights, individual liberty, State rights, and enlightenment philosophy, Jefferson had no peer.

President John F. Kennedy once held a dinner at the White House for a group of the brightest minds in the nation at that time. He made this statement: "This is perhaps the assembly of the most intelligence ever to gather at one time in the White House with the exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone." He was probably right.

Jefferson served in the Continental Congress; he was the first Secretary of State; he was the third President of the United States; he commissioned the Lewis and Clark expedition; he was the author of the Virginia Statute For Religious Freedom, which is regarded as one of the greatest declarations of religious liberty ever written; he spoke five languages and could read two others; he knew and influenced virtually every man who would be regarded as a Founding Father today; and he wrote nearly 16,000 personal letters. Had not the British burned much of it in the War of 1812, his library would probably go down as the greatest personal collection of literary works ever collected by one man. Without Thomas Jefferson, there would be no America.

Patrick Henry

Patrick Henry was the colonies' most ardent advocate of liberty--bar none! In oratorical genius, he has never had an equal. Henry was a self-educated lawyer, successful farmer, devoted father of 17 children, and five-term governor of Virginia. Henry was the first Founding Father to defy British taxes, and in so doing was the first who was willing to risk death as a traitor.

Patrick Henry's immortal speech at St. John's Church in Richmond to a gathering of the Virginia legislators in 1775 is regarded yet today as the most influential speech ever delivered on American soil. Probably more people are acquainted with that "Give Me Liberty, Or Give Me Death!" speech
than any other public address ever delivered.

Henry's contribution to the War for Independence cannot be underestimated. As Governor of Virginia (the richest and most populated of the 13 colonies), he supplied the largest share of arms and munitions to the outnumbered and poorly provisioned Continental Army. It was also Patrick Henry and his fellow Anti-Federalists who were primarily responsible for the first ten amendments to the Constitution (the Bill of Rights) being drafted and ratified. Without Patrick Henry, there would be no America.

Samuel Adams

Samuel Adams is rightly called "The Father of the American Revolution." He was a cousin to President John Adams and a graduate of Harvard. He was perhaps the most influential member of the Massachusetts State legislature. He succeeded John Hancock as Governor of Massachusetts. He was a delegate to the Continental Congress and a signer of the Declaration of Independence. He, along with men such as Dr. Joseph Warren, Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, Richard Henry Lee, and Josiah Quincy, Jr., created the "Committees of Correspondence," which became the principle conduit of articles and letters of pro-revolution, pro-liberty, and pro-independence communication between the colonies. Adams was also very influential in the now-famous Boston Tea Party.

Sam Adams was so hated by the British government that they used military force to try and apprehend him, which led to both the Boston Massacre on March 5, 1770, and the "Shot Fired Heard 'Round The World" at Lexington Green and Concord Bridge on April 19, 1775. Without Samuel Adams, there would be no America.

James Madison

James Madison is properly called "The Father of The US Constitution." He was the fourth President of the United States and was the principal author of the Bill of Rights. Madison authored more than a third of the Federalist Papers. Thomas Jefferson referred to the Federalist Papers as "The best commentary on the principles of government, which ever was written." Madison served as US Representative from Virginia and as Secretary of State under Jefferson. George Washington considered Madison to be the preeminent authority on the US Constitution in the entire country.

Madison was a fervent proponent of the principle of divided power. He believed government (especially the federal government) could not be trusted with too much power and worked to ensure the separation of powers within the federal government. He also was a major proponent of State rights and sovereignty. Madison broke with Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton over Hamilton's promotion of the State Bank, and together with Thomas Jefferson, formed what became known as the Democrat-Republican Party. Madison also co-authored with Jefferson two of the most prominent documents of liberty: the Kentucky and Virginia resolutions. Without James Madison, there would be no America.

As we celebrate Independence Day this year, I trust and pray that each of us will reacquaint ourselves with the principles upon which the Declaration of Independence was written, and upon which the United States of America was founded. And while we are doing that, let's be sure we are passing these principles on to our children and grandchildren, because without their dedication and commitment to liberty, there will be no America!

Ramirez and Whittle on lessons learned for this Independence Day

July 4, 2012
Hot Air.com

Mark Levin: I'd rather fight with a moderate Republican than give Obama a 2nd term!

Mark Levin talks to Megyn Kelly about Roberts’ decision

July 3, 2012
The Right Scoop

Mark Levin went on with Megyn Kelly today to discuss the Roberts’ decision and how detrimental it was to our Constitution:

TO WATCH