well, not only ted, clinton vetoes welfare reform
twice with some workfare in it. on the third try i
think his advisors told him that vetoing this was
hurting his poll numbers so he signed it and then
claimed it for his inititive. it was pushed on him,
but, all pols will do that. if they are forced to
support something they don't like, they'll put the
best face on it. republican or democrate will do that.
they are all two faced.

--- Kat <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Heh, by some liberal standards, I'm rather
> conservative.
>
> I don't believe in welfare at all. I think it's
> self-perpetuating, self-defeating, and worse of all,
> does away with any motivation to work.  After all,
> why go out and find a job if you can get the noney
> to live on by doing nothing?  And I also think it's
> anti-population control.  If you get more money for
> having more children, then you're motivitated to
> have more babies.  So, no, I don't believe in
> welfare.
>
> But I do believe in workfare and jobs training and
> doing what it takes to get people back on their
> feet.  That means support for daycare,
> transportation, clothing, etc.
>
> And yes, I do realise there and will always be those
> who cannot work because they are disabled or ill.
> They are the ones who need full financial support,
> but I consider them disability cases, not welfare
> cases.
>
> I expressed my surprise at Ted's being anti-workfare
> because that seems such a good compromise between
> the liberal and conservative factions.  I don't pay
> too much attention to him any more, I'm afraid.  :(
> I'm more interested in my local Congressman and US
> Senators.  I do like John Edwards as a moderate Dem.
>
> Kat
>
>
>
>
>
> -------Original Message-------
> From: ken barber <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: 08/01/03 09:57 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: work programs with appology to Kat
>
> >
> > i was looking at a few of yesterday's postings and
> noticed one i sent to respond to one of yours kat. i
> said "gee, that sounds short. i did not mean that to
> look like that." so 1st appologies to you kat.
>
> i on 2nd look realize you were shooting at much more
> than workfare which as been brought up as part of
> welfare reform. you were talking a whole new program
> ala fdr's ccc. if you took  every able bodied,
> healthy
> person on welfare and put them in "civilian work
> corps" leaving welfare for those that are unable to
> work. put these to work building or rebuilding the
> country's infrastucture, working the parks ect. so
> that the taxpayers would get something visible for
> their money. pay the people fairly for the work.
> there
> would be some politicians who in their hearts might
> not support it, but, becouse the public would
> support
> it, they could not polictically afford to openly
> oppose it. i do think there would be lots of support
> for that, even amounst us heartless conservatives.
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site
> design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
> >


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com