|
|
| 2 Guys today dropped "the ball" again....amazing what a few hours can do! (895940) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
2 Guys today dropped "the ball" again....amazing what a few hours can do! |
|
|
Posted by streetcarman1 on Thu Jan 5 21:34:54 2012, in response to Gingrich to black people: paychecks, not food aid, posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Thu Jan 5 20:54:48 2012. First Santorum compares gay marriage to polygamy.....what's next from the guy? more attacks on fringes of American society....scapegoating..at best.Next.....good ole Newt lashes out on African-Americans for taking Food Stamps.....even though 1/3 of recipiants are African-Americans. From CBSNEWS.COM: Posted at 06:29 PM ET, 01/05/2012 Rick Santorum compares same-sex marriage to polygamy, in spirited exchange at N.H. college By Sandhya Somashekhar DURHAM, N.H. - Rick Santorum took on a restive audience Thursday night over the issue of same-sex marriage, which the former Pennsylvania senator vociferously opposes. Asked by a college student why he opposed the right of same-sex couples to wed, he responded that there was no compelling reason to allow it and suggested that it was akin to legalizing polygamy. “So, everybody has the right to be happy?” he said. “So, if you’re not happy unless you’re married to five other people, is that OK?” Santorum’s logic provoked an outcry from the audience, which was made up primarily of local college students but also a number of local conservative voters who were there to support the surging presidential candidate. It was the first such confrontation over Santorum’s well-documented opposition to gay rights and gay marriage since his surprisingly strong finish in the Iowa caucuses, but it probably won’t be the last. New Hampshire has allowed same-sex marriage since 2010, and voters who were unaware of Santorum’s stance on the issues are likely to hear a great deal about them now that he is emerging as the Christian conservative standard-bearer in the race. The grilling began almost immediately after Santorum concluded his opening remarks at an event sponsored by the New England College. Student after student challenged him on his stance, especially in light of his earlier remarks about the founding principle that all men were created equal. Santorum, who is accustomed to this sort of questioning from college students and seems to somewhat relish it, first tried arguing that there was no compelling reason to change the current laws banning same-sex marriage. “Don’t you have to make a positive argument that the law should be changed?” he asked the crowd. “You, the person who wants do this, tell me, what is the justification? What is the public purpose?” The comment elicited a chorus of answers, which Santorum tried to quiet. “We’re not shouting out here. Raise your hand, I’ll give you the opportunity.” Another audience member argued that gay couples would like the right to visit each other in the hospital. Santorum responded that adults may already enter into legal contracts to declare such rights. Then he made his polygamy comparison. “If it makes three people happy to get married, based on what you just said, what makes that wrong?” he asked one of the questioners. “That’s irrelevant,” she responded. “In my opinion, yeah, go for it. But what I’m asking you is how do you justify your beliefs based on these high morals you have about all men being created equal?” Santorum summed up his position this way: “God made man and woman, and men and women come together to have a union to produce children, which keeps civilization going and provides the best environment for choldren to be raised.” Santorum then tried to shift the discussion to other topics, but it came up again at the end. When he finally concluded the event, his closing thanks were greeted with a chorus of boos. By Sandhya Somashekhar | 06:29 PM ET, 01/05/2012 ------------------------------------------------------------------ January 5, 2012 7:16 PM Gingrich singles out blacks in food stamp remark By Lucy Madison Topics Campaign 2012 Updated: 8:59 p.m. ET Just days after Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum took heat for singling out blacks on entitlement reform, Newt Gingrich called out the African-American community for being dependent on food stamps -- despite the fact that blacks make up less than one third of recipients in the food stamp program. Gingrich, during an appearance in Plymouth, New Hampshire, spoke about remarks he would theoretically make if invited to speak to the NAACP. "I'm prepared if the NAACP invites me, I'll go to their convention and talk about why the African American community should demand paychecks and not be satisfied with food stamps," Gingrich said. The former House speaker has made a habit of calling President Obama the "food stamp president" -- a nickname he used on Thursday as well -- and has often painted the contrast between himself and Mr. Obama as a choice between paychecks and food stamps. "The fact is, if I become your nominee we will make the key test very simple: Food stamps versus paychecks," Gingrich said. "Obama is the best food stamp president in American history. More people are on food stamps today because of Obama's policies than ever in history. I would like to be the best paycheck president in American history." The use of food stamps in America has continued to climb in recent years, and hit an all-time high of nearly 45 million in 2011. According to U.S. Census Bureau, about 28 percent of households that receive food stamps are African American, while 59 percent are white. According to the same report, about 78 percent of American households are white, while about 12 percent are black. (The overall population is 72.4 percent white and 12.6 percent black.) Oscar Eason, President of NAACP State Conference of Alaska, Oregon and Washington State, told CBS News Gingrich's comment "goes right to the heart of real racism - that African Americans are lazy and don't want to work and depend entirely on handouts. Sarah Huisenga contributed to this report. |
|
|
|