posted by Sam Richards
Here’s an interesting event — an elected official referring to welfare recipients as animals. That would be “animals” and not, you know, “the human animal.” This is one of those rather unfortunate things that people sometimes think but can never, ever say in public. In fact, frankly speaking, I’d guess that lots of people have referred to poor people who may or may not be on welfare as “animals.” “They’re just like animals!” or “They act like animals.” or “Put ‘em all in a cage like the animals that they are.” The difference is that people on welfare are, in fact, human beings who happen to be represented by politicians. Oh yes, and do I need to say that most poor people on welfare are children? What decisions did THEY make to merit calling them “animals”?
And do I also need to say that everyone collects welfare subsidies of some sort, and that the vast majority of subsidies go to the very wealthy? I do, of course, because like most people, you probably don’t think of welfare subsidies that are given away to anybody but the poor.
Let me help you here. Think Obama’s “welfare queens” who live lavish lifestyles as they come begging to the distributors of public tax dollars. Actually, I just mispoke here because they don’t come begging; they send their puppets from “K Street” (that would be lobbyists, for those not familiar with inside the beltway jargon). Why don’t you take a moment and think about how many negative thoughts you’ve had about poor welfare recipients as compared to those you’ve formulated about rich ones…if you’ve ever actually had any of the latter.
So while some guy sipping a shot of JD and pounding down Miller Lites at the corner bar might call food stamp collectors “animals,” elected officials ought to keep their thoughts to themselves…or they might show their hand and reveal whose side they’re actually on.
“Sanford’s lieutenant governor, Andre Bauer, likens government assistance to feeding stray animals”
By Michael Sheridan
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER — Tuesday, January 26th 2010A South Carolina politician is making very a public apology – and this time it’s not Governor Mark Sanford. After likening welfare recepients to stray animals, Andre Bauer, the embattled Republican’s lieutenant governor, is hastily back-pedalling from remarks his rivals have called “immoral.”
“My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals,” he said during a Town Hall meeting on Thursday.
“You know why? Because they breed! You’re facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don’t think too much further than that.”
Bauer hopes to ascend to the state’s highest seat in November’s election, where he would succeed the sex-scandal scarred Mark Sanford, who’s affair with an Argentine mistress made him the butt of late-night talk.
The 40-year-old was quickly targeted by Democratic rivals for the remarks. “I am disgusted by these comments,” said state Sen. Vincent Sheheen. “His comments were immoral and out of line.” South Carolina schools Superintendent Jim Rex labeled them “reprehensible.”
No stranger to firing off intemperate remarks, Bauer has offered something of an apology. “Do I wish I’d used a different metaphor? Of course,” he said. “I didn’t intend to offend anyone.”
Despite his choice of words, Bauer noted he feels welfare recipients should be required to submit to drug tests and attend parent-teacher conferences if they have kids in school.
With no surprise, I agree with the majority here that these misinformed and hurtful comments by the lieutenant governor are unacceptable. But what I do not agree with, is that the governor made a mistake and did not mean to say what he said. Sure, he said what he thinks; the problem is he is apologizing for the wrong thing. I do not think another metaphor would have better exhibited his stance behind the welfare issue. Clearly, this man is misinformed about the social problems of the United States and is unfit to be a public official. And by him saying he didn’t mean to offend anyone is humorous. I would like to know what he meant instead, when he compared people living in poverty to stray animals? And what did he intend for his point to be when he spoke of inhibiting the reproductive human rights of individuals, when speaking of the United State’s poor?
In his apology when he stands behind requiring drug-testing for welfare recipients is another interesting comment. If we are asking the poor to take drug tests, then maybe we should ask anyone receiving public funds to also take drug tests I bet he would not support that. But what is the difference? Why should one population receiving government funds take a drug test over another?
The sad part about this all, is that this man probably has never had any type of relationship with someone from a poor community. It’s likely that he attended a university where he wasn’t introduced to people from economically difficult backgrounds and did not take classes that exposed him to social problems to the full extent. So he is simple ignorant and blind to the realities of the working and lower class Americans.
What isn’t surprising about these comments is another republican using a ridiculous metaphor to explain their reasoning for taking particular stances on issues. It seems a republican can’t go without doing this and I think it goes back to a post from last week, that their strategies is a simple, easy to understand message. The problem is, there is not a simple answer to poverty. And a message, explaining that one should not provide free food to the poor because they will reproduce is just completely off the wall.
My question is who allows this type of behavior to remain. It seems this poor representation of American citizens is a common thing, and relatively acceptable with an apology. So why do we allow this to continue? I guess it’s simple, the people these comments are aimed at are working or don’t have access to the internet/TV., or better yet, don’t have the resources to mobilize to stop this type of behavior from their local officials.
[Reply]
Andre Bauer’s comments were indeed offensive and absolutely intolerable especially coming from a man of his stature. There shouldn’t be any reason or excuse why he would say something like this or even believing it as well. He probably came from a family of wealth which garnered him education desired by those from less fortunate backgrounds. I’m led to believe that those of higher class even though given a good education have a sense of ignorance and have no idea of the dangers and suffering this world has bestowed upon many people. Also, to call those who are in need of welfare I believe is unfair. As taught in class, the once nice neighborhoods from urban cities are now dilapidated and even dangerous. An array of events have occurred to make this happen, but the main aspect of this starts with the abolition of slavery and the control of the system from “The Whites” throughout the years. So even though those who may seem educated and prosperous, they might not be as educated as you think they are. This, among many other reasons is why this country is hard on minorities because those of power are not willing to share it with those who are different from them. This is a very sad realization. Does the majority of the world really have a distrust or hatred against each other? Are we really that uncomfortable with each other as well? We’ve been on this earth for quite a long time and we have yet to resolve our differences. Of course, things have gotten better thanks to many people who today stand in history as heroes, but there still is a lot of work ahead of us.
Bauer may have apologized but no one will ever know if it was sincere. Personally, I don’t think he honestly cares. He probably cares more about ascending to the state’s highest seat in November, which is why he had to publicly apologize in the first place. This will definitely hinder Bauer in his political career and may even cost him his seat in November, and now democrats have seen this and taken the opportunity to help destroy him even though I agree with most of their comments. That’s all politics really is, the fight for corrupt power.
[Reply]
So after reading Sam's comment and the actual comment made by Governor Bauer I have formed a couple opinions. The first is based of Sam's comments. I have thought for years before the recession how I knew of people who's families took advantage of welfare just so they could get the extra money, which is wrong and is stealing from the people who actually need the money and those that have to pay taxes to keep welfare alive. But I do understand that is a small minority. The interesting point that Sam brought up is how the rich do it as well and you know I never really thought about that. I always just assumed you know that the poorer class were those that took advantage of the system in that way. That is why I like this class, Sam gives you all different views and lets you figure it out on your own and form your own opinion.
Now to the comment made by Governor Bauer. There is no excuse for such a comment. I have gone to Philadelphia and have given food and blankets to people who are homeless and below welfare and guess what they are human beings, they have feelings, and they are very grateful for what they get. The other part is they look out for each other. There is no reason for Bauer to make such a comment. The worst part was his apology. "I wish I had used a different analogy." Are you serious? The fact that you even think that way makes me wonder why he is in office and not taking more political heat not just from the Democrats but the American public. I have never heard someone call the poor or people on welfare animals. That may be because I don't associate myself with people who have no heart or sense like this Governor. To some of the comments made here, yes we have all made stupid comments where we wish we could take them back and no that does not make us a bad person, but when you are in a public office you can not say something like this. Plus how low can you be to compare human beings to animals? I know some people will be a smart ass and say well we compare ourselves to apes all the time, but lets be real this is a totally different situation.
[Reply]
The rich on welfare? I never new that existed, let alone examined how many negative thoughts I’ve had about rich welfare recipients. But on the bright side, it’s nice to know Latrell Sprewell has somewhere to turn if $14.6 million isn’t enough for him because he’s “got [his] family to feed.”
In case you didn’t know, Sprewell, a former Minnesota Timberwolves basketball player, became irritated at the team when it hesitated to offer him a contract extension while he was making $14.6 million from the team that 2004 season. He then dropped that line.
Reading Bauer’s comments reminded me of another incident I found surprising – and it wasn’t the time Sprewell choked his former coach. As a high school senior, I volunteered at a local Red Cross through the school’s student council. Shortly before Christmas, we prepared food and gifts for needy families. Someone would come to the Red Cross to pick up a package, and we would help load their cars. The ironic thing about the situation was that there were people who came to pick up their packages in Mercedes with elaborate stereo systems.
Granted, I know there are fallacies in a statement like that. I had no idea of any one person’s individual situation. Volunteering really made me realize how fortunate I am in a lot of regards, and I felt pretty well-off compared to some of the people I saw, but it was hard to feel remorse for those who put wants before needs.
Don’t get me wrong – Bauer’s statements were harsh and inappropriate. It was disrespectful to compare people to animals, and I don’t disagree that welfare programs should provide aid to those who are struggling financially. I believe in second chances for people who make mistakes. But when I see people who struggle to feed their kids drive cars that do more than get from point A to B – living beyond their means, simply put – I can’t help but share in some of Bauer’s frustration. As a taxpayer, I don’t mind seeing my money go to others in the form of financial aid for their needs. But that’s the thing – for their needs, not their wants.
And that includes the wealthy. I don’t know anything about welfare for the wealthy other than what Sam posted, but that’s just as much of a crime as the poor who use welfare for luxuries. I look upon those wealthy just as negatively as those poor. I also don’t disagree with Bauer’s feeling that “welfare recipients should be required to submit to drug tests and attend parent-teacher conferences if they have kids in school.” For the poor AND wealthy welfare recipients.
Bauer’s comments were interesting in the sense that this was a case of a politician speaking his true feelings – a happening that doesn’t always occur in politics. Because politicians often mask their opinions to appeal to the masses in the game that is politics, it was refreshing, in a sense, to see this come out. Not what he said, but the fact that he said it. He’s already proving to be more honest than South Carolina’s last governor.
[Reply]
After reading this, my immediate response correlates to Thursday's lecture about how we all begin our lives at different starting points. People born into rich families are usually guaranteed education through college and are often sent on to graduate school or set up in a successful field with little to no serious struggle. Middle class families can almost always send their children to high school and some sort of college, whether it be community college or a university. Poor families begin on a completely different playing field. "Poor" is a very vague term that holds many meanings. There are poor people who cannot afford a house big enough to support their family, and there are poor people who cannot afford to eat. Sometimes poverty is all people know and they struggle to make ends meet the best they can. Other times, poverty strikes as a result of losing a job or having too many bills to keep up with. Regardless of the reason a family is poor, sometimes people have no choice but to go on welfare to support their families. The sole fact that a person or family is on welfare does not determine their worth and status as an American. Yes, majority of the time poor people receiving welfare do come from lower classes. A lot of the time they are not well educated and make some major financial mistakes, like having more children than they can support. However, this does not make them "animals" by any means. They are still people living in the same country as you and I. They are given the right as Americans to seek help and be on welfare. I was shocked to hear about the wealthy people who receive subsidies. That was the first reference I ever heard regarding the "welfare queens". Obviously Andre Bauer left this elite group out of his "animal" category of people on welfare.
It is true that the welfare system is not perfect here in America. Many people cheat the system, have more children, or are just plain lazy and want their checks. But by categorizing ALL people into this group of undeserving recipients is rude and inappropriate. His half-hearted apology for his statements says a lot about his character. He really needs some better PR people if he wants to get anywhere after those statements. By taking office, he represents all types of people: rich, middle class, poor, and everyone in between. If he thinks he can take the highest seat he needs to rethink his insensitivity and come back with a serious plan to fix his mistakes. South Carolina better find some more suited candidates for the election. They would be better off with a sex scandal than an insensitive bastard like Andre Bauer.
[Reply]
Everybody has a different story. I know this may not be a great example, but on the MTV show Teen Mom, one of the single mothers had to go on welfare. Yes, she made the mistake of getting pregnant when she was young, but she was trying to stand on her own two feet and the only way she could move forward was to go on welfare. She had no assistance from her parents and she was trying her hardest to get her GED. She wanted a better future for herself and her daughter. Therefore, one can never make the generalization of saying “everyone” on welfare are “animals.”
[Reply]
This is so disgusting, it's hard for me to find the words. In STS 100 class last semester, this same thing was brought up in our group discussion, and I couldn't believe the comments that these kids were making, let alone a state rep. I understand that lots of people on welfare do nothing with their lives, and just try to mooch off of everyone else. Working the system. But hell, I feel that we have all tried to work the system, I mean if you don't come from a family with wealth it is hard to follow the systems rules. What about the animals like Madoff! WTF I don't understand people that come from money, since I haven't been around it. They are born with a silver spoon in their mouth and have no idea how hard it is for people with not so much money, feeding a family of four. The State rep. said that his grandma said something about feeding stray cats, how typical…it must run in the family. And that's the thing right there, that I just don't understand, my grandma would give her last piece of bread to someone less fortunate, that's how I was raised. How pathetic are these people to think that they are the only ones in the world, and that's just what is happening. The powerful and riding the world of poor people, just like the Holocaust it could turn into a mass genocide, instead of race, it's our money! Unfortunately somebody has to ruin it for everyone. I'm talking about those people that really do not need the food stamps, housing..etc. and they do just sit around and get stoned all day, eating the food they bought with taxpayers money. It is bad but does that mean we have to shut down the whole operation because of dishonest people? I agree with the guy writing before me that these animal's that he is speaking of do need to get off their asses. It's just pathetic, and it does generate more people of the same kind, because children learn from their parents, hell they have no chance. These kids look at their parents and think it is fine. So, I can understand what the State guy was saying but he needs a to get hit shit straight before he starts offending people. It is not fair for the people that do use this system properly, to be called names like that. That would make me feel like a a piece of shit. People can have opinions but this is one of the things we should be politically correct about even if it is what you believe. Drop the wealthy or poor title and we are still human beings. That's the big picture that EVERYONE is forgetting about. Wealthy people and their children need to stop feeling the need to be superior than that of the lower class. If a big asteroid comes tomorrow, that Bentley isn't going to save you any faster than a bike. Okay, that's a little farfetched but you get the idea….
[Reply]
After reading this article, I am shocked that Governor Bauer has said such harsh words. He needs to think about what he's going to say before he says it. Just because those families weren’t born into a wealthy families doesn’t give anyone the right to judge them. As my grandmother always told me if someone’s in need you should help them. Welfare was meant for those in need so it should be given to people especially if they have large families to take care of.
In today’s society, American’s abuse the power to get help from others. Americans sign up for welfare when they really don’t need it and cheat the system. This is making it harder for people to get help when they really need financial support. Although, I don’t feel they should be called “animals,” some are ashamed to even ask for help. I feel it’s wrong when families take advantage of the welfare system to get money from them when they don’t have jobs. Most people will get on welfare because their lazy and don’t want to take care of their family. When you’re struggling with money problems you shouldn’t have large families because it makes things harder on you. In today’s society now a lot of people are going through economic problems and are reaching out for help.
It’s crazy that people will look down on others when their in need. Since he’s a governor he probably came from money so he wouldn’t understand the circumstances people go through. Instead of talking down on the problem he should be finding ways to help reduce the problem. Also, maybe he’ll see that their not all “drug addicts” and need to get tested before they can obtain welfare.
I truly believe though you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover because there are people today who have a lot of money but don’t flaunt it. Governor Bauer was way out of line to come at individuals the way he did, with such disrespect. He’s supposed to representing our country and he talking down on the individuals that live in it. He doesn’t know the current situations those people are going through now. Maybe both parents lost their jobs or something worse happened. He should bite his tongue because karma is a bitch and when something happens to him (god forbid) it’s going to be one of those “animals” that helps him!!
[Reply]
I appreciate the right of free speech as much as the next person. But this man should not only have to apologize for his remarkable stupid and insensitive comments, but be made to live, for just one day, on the salary of someone who is eligible for the welfare benefits that he is condemning. Welfare was made to help those who have NEED. What exactly is he against? How can someone be against something that is helping out their fellow human live in a reasonable way. Welfare does not provide enough money, goods, or services for someone to live a "rich" life. It provides people with the bare necessities to help them live within their means. Now, are there some people who abuse the system? Of course. But, for the most part, those that need welfare use it in the proper and intended way. The worst part of all of this, is his profession of christianity.
[Reply]
This man belongs to a church in South Carolina. As a Christian, he is called to love as Christ loved. To help the poor, sick, and weak, to support those who cannot support themselves. And his comments are not only rude and insensitive, but super hypocritical. Not only is he not following the tenants that are supposed to rule his life, but he is pusposefully insulting them. His characterization of giving free lunches to children as feeding stray animals is disgusting. These are children that are not given enough money to buy food by their parents. What have these children done to deserve where they are? What have they done to deserve this treatment from a man who is supposed to represent their best interest in the government? He should be made to live one life in the day of one of this children that he wants to deprive of food. South Carolina has been put through many scandals at the hands of their elected officials. It is time for the people of South Carolina to stand up and say that they have had enough of this behavior from their governmental representatives.
[Reply]
When I hear that someone is on welfare, I do have a connotation of what type of person that is. I hate to say it and I hate to even think it. I was raised believing that I can do whatever I want if I put my mind to it. I was raised believing that other people can do whatever they want if they put their mind’s to whatever they wish to accomplish. My views are somewhat changing. Only somewhat. People who go on welfare are taking money from the government if they need it. If they need the money, I am all about it being given to them to help put food on the table and keep their children in school. I think our country is so great because we have a welfare program, which keeps many families off the streets. It insures a lifestyle. You do not make much from welfare so the lifestyle it insures is not much, but enough, which is exactly the point of it. From that standpoint- welfare seems wonderful. However, many people who collect welfare are not in dire “need” of it. Some people are lazy. Some people think jobs are beneath them so they hold out for ones they think are suitable. One of my uncles was laid-off a few years ago, just when the economy started to take it’s turn. He was 60 and close enough to retirement age that he made the decision to stop looking for work. My aunt still brings home the bacon as a kindergarten schoolteacher. He made a conscious decision to not go back to work. However, from what the government knows- he cannot find work. He is cheating the system. This is the kind of person who is completely taking advantage of welfare and one of the people who gives it a bad name. He and my aunt remain middle-upper-class and go on regular vacations all over the world. This bugs the heck of out of me because I lose a good amount of money every year in taxes from working at minimum wage jobs just to scrape some money together to pay for college, car insurance, and any other expenses I may have. My lost money is going into their pocket. I believe in family first before anything else, but in this case it is so wrong what my uncle is doing. It is extremely frustrating! A different uncle I have, one who is less educated, working blue collar jobs his whole life was also laid-off a few years ago. My aunt kept her job as an emergency telephone operator. He began collecting unemployment. He is actually looking for jobs, but the annoying thing is- he has found jobs and not taken them because he believes them to be beneath him. Meanwhile, he and my aunt just vacationed in Hawaii. Please riddle me this, how do you collect unemployment, yet have enough money to take vacations? I believe in hard work, and if you have the means to work- then you should. As annoyed as I get at people who collect welfare without just cause, people who need it should absolutely be entitled to receiving it. In no way are they animals. Humans are humans and if someone thinks they are better than someone else because they don’t need to collect welfare, then they are sadly mistaken and are no friend of mine.
[Reply]
The most insulting part of Governor Bauer’s statements, it seems, is not just that he likens welfare recipients to animals. It is that he likens these recipients to animals and therefore suggests not “feeding them” so that they cannot “breed”. Does providing welfare encourage more welfare recipients? I do not know if this is the case, but I do know that the statement was horribly inappropriate.
I do agree that something needs to be done to restructure the welfare system. I do not claim to know an exceptional amount about the system, but from the statistics and stories I have heard about the system, it does not work quite in the way it intends to. It all goes back to an old proverb about teaching man to fish. If you give somebody money they will be able to purchase their groceries/necessities for the day, but if you assist them in finding a job and setting up a better life, then they will be able to provide for themselves for a much longer time.
Welfare is a system set up for a reason, and to insinuate that those who are benefiting, in whatever small way they do benefit, from the system are “animals” is a horrible stereotype. There are people on welfare who should not be. There are people who need to find a better way to provide for their families, or who are capable of finding a job and just choose not to. I do not doubt this. However, there are people on welfare for all the right reasons. These are the reasons the system was set up in the first place.
If the people on welfare have become “animals” who should not be “fed,” then that is the fault of the government and those who are running the system, not of those who are following the rules which are set up for them.
Stereotyping an entire section of the population as “animals,” has a horrible, and somewhat racist connotation. The masses on welfare are not uncivilized, untrained, inhumane. They are those who have had trouble in their lives, and are experiencing financial difficulties. If the government could set up a better system which provides jobs and training/educational opportunities for those who need it, then welfare would not be quite as necessary. But as the system exists currently, those on welfare have very little chances of ever getting off welfare.
It is true that if you feed an animal once, they are likely to continue coming back again and again. I understand the idea of likening this to welfare recipients in that fact, but to actually insinuate that the recipients are animals is just offensive. It is a mistake and a racist/rude comment that nobody should make, particularly not a politician.
[Reply]
In today’s society, the United States and other countries are greatly influenced by the media. Athletes, Actors, Politicians all are under an intense spot light. The media focuses their mission to translate/interrupt what these people of status say. Sometimes the remarks of the indivual are in an interview or in a movie or even in a sporting event. Ever second that a person has a high status in society, that person will always be liable for some type of scrutiny. In this particular situation, a man under an intense spot light is being criticized for his words. Mark Sanford basically called people on welfare “animals”. In many cases, context is often out of line and doesn’t particularly mean what is said. This is the exception, what Mark said was legitimate. This man is supposed to represent all the people in his state equally and freely.
[Reply]
By calling his own people stay animals is one hundred percent out of line. What give him the right to call people animals? Is he the animal for saying such a cruel comment? I’m not just jumping on the band wagon like everyone else and saying this guy is horrible but there should be something done for his actions. The most powerful and righteous way for the “animals” of his state to get even would to vote for someone else in the upcoming election. They can use their legal power in a positive sense and accomplish their mission of revenge. (That is of course, if they want revenge) In other cases where people say something inappropriate would usually occur in athletics. Just recently Serena Williams accused a judge of cheating and called him inappropriate names in the process. The man fortunately made the right call and had no motive of cheating. Williams was then face with of lots of bad publicity. Both cases (politics and athletics) resulted in bad publicity.
[Reply]
In the athletic case, Williams made a public apology to the judge and most of all to her fans because the fans were the most hurt for her actions. In both cases, the athlete and the politician represent the United States as a whole. Citizens do not want someone who represents them as an inappropriate speaker or a person who does offensive actions. People want a symbol, a person who is better than them, and a person who will always do what is right. Elections in the United States prove that every year. People will not elect a president if they feel that the elected will be a failure. You know why? Its instinct! If a politician consistently bashed a particular group of people he would never get elected present or elected office. People ultimately have a basic instinct to would a positive leader that will lead to them to a successful life.
[Reply]
Wow, really? I can't believe a public figure as important as a Lieutenant Governor would dare make a statement about the people he governs. Actually, considering the stereotypes about politicians, maybe not.
Anyway, I suppose that I can see where he's coming from- his point, if you will- about continuously helping people with welfare money can foster reliance on the government to sustain them. But that's a very Free-Will Libertarian way of looking at it, huh? That, if we keep helping them out, they won't make the decision to get up and get a job, or work to get themselves out of poverty. But that's a narrow-minded way of looking at it, too. Because there could definitely be material conditions affecting their ability to get up out of poverty, too.
Whatever the real problem is, his comments are out of line, and his ideas are shakey. Really? Likening a fraction of his people to stray animals? That was not wise.
[Reply]
It completely and totally shocks me that someone could go as far as to call a human being an animal is disgusting only because they are on welfare. I have heard people refer to others as acting like animals over fights but never because they are attempting to get food. I didn’t realize that most people who are on welfare are children which is awful to think about because that isn’t their choice in the slightest and it is because of those people who consider them animals not attempting to help them that they remain that way. There are many people that put themselves in bad situations but I do not feel that it is ever to call them animals, especially when so many are better off.
[Reply]
Reading some of the responses I noticed a majority of individuals used the term mistake. I cannot honestly call what Mr. Bauer did a mistake since it is hard for me to believe that a politician made remarks without having them first checked over numerous times. Thus I feel he knew exactly what he was saying and had to know what kind of response it would evoke. That is why the first issue about this article I would like to address is his issuing of an apology. I understand that as a public figure it was probably the smart move to apologize, it just bothers me to have to watch someone who is clearly intelligent have to say sorry for something he clearly isn’t sorry for, anticipating that the general public is so dimwitted that they will just accept it for face value.
The next issue I feel needs to be discussed is the most obvious one which everyone responding has touched on. It was clearly wrong for Mr. Bauer to refer to poor people on welfare as animals. I would hope that this is universally agreed upon and understood but from this article, it is clearly not. Just because people don’t have much money, doesn’t take away from the fact that they are still people. The poor need to be protected, represented, and accounted for just like every citizen, and to be referred to as animals by one of the people who represent is disheartening to say the least. Sometimes in life people go throw rough patches, bad luck, or a multitude of things which culminate in them losing or not having money, but to pretend that they are no longer people is immoral. If anything these people need to be represented the most by politicians because many of them are overlooked and don’t get their voices heard. Clearly Mr. Bauer was wrong in referring to these people as animals, and I do hope that when he is up for reelection people remember this incident before casting their vote.
Again what Mr. Bauer said about poor people on welfare was wrong, but that doesn’t mean that every point he made was wrong too. For instance, it is mentioned that he would like welfare recipients to take mandatory drug tests and be required to attend parent-teacher conferences if they have kids. There may be merits to the latter point, but I will focus more on the first point about drug tests. I couldn’t agree more with this point. While I would not make the claim that all poor welfare recipients use that money to fund drugs, there certainly is a preconception that this is true, and is more than likely true is some cases. While it would be an inconvenience to be forced to take a drug test to receive welfare, it would be a minor inconvenience at best and would help gain some public backing for a program which is disliked by so many. I don’t think people have as much a problem with giving money away to people who need it, as they do that money is going to be wasted given to people who are going to use it for bad purposes. By imposing a mandatory drug test, people will be reassured that money going to the poor is more likely going to help the poor, and just seems like a simple idea that would put a lot of people’s minds to ease.
[Reply]
Ideally this wouldn’t be a huge “to do”, but in actuality we must be politically correct and can not call anyone “animals”. Andre Bauer was obviously not fully thinking when he made his opinion public. First off, he needs votes if he would like to retain his job as a politician and if he thought of the number of people on welfare, he wouldn’t have made this statement public. In Bauer’s defense, he supported this immoral claim with reason of it. Noting that he feels welfare recipients should be required to take drug tests and attend parent-teacher conferences defends where he was coming from. The whole taking a drug test is obvious, he believes a large number of welfare receivers are spending their money on non essential things, and he wants to minimize this, especially if it is going to drugs. I mean hey, I don’t want my tax money going to drug lords and evidentially supporting crime. Getting back to the other portion of his claim, welfare recipients should be required to attend parent-teacher conferences, directly relates to his immoral claim that, “people need to stop feeding stray animals because they breed”. I feel like this was a very low and immature claim about welfare recipients. Like Sam discussed in lecture today looking at the situation from the other point of view, Andre Bauer would have made a different statement. He then would realize the world of unemployment and trying to support your family, often leading to selling of drugs and other types of crime. And I’m not going out and attacking him, because I’m sure he really meant this claim to was the portion of welfare recipients that spend their receiving’s on drugs. I read in another comment that someone brought up the point that everyone receives some form of aid, just with a different name such as “student loans” and the bonuses Bauer. I just would like to say how this is an invalid point, it’s like comparing apples and oranges. Well first off, student’s loans get repaid and they are given out to those in need. And the bonus, that is for any high paying job that required hard work to get there, so I don’t really think you can compare salary bonuses and welfare. Now I’m getting slightly off topic but what it all boils down to is the fact that Bauer made a huge mistake by publicly displaying his opinion. Maybe there are some people taking advantage of welfare, but I’m sure a majority of them wish that they weren’t dependant of it and could be free from the burden. I’m sure Bauer’s apologize won’t help dig himself out of the hole he put himself into by the time of next elections, so everyone that was infuriated by his statements, he’ll pay sooner or later.
[Reply]
Welfare is pretty much taking money from the rich and giving to the poor, and guess who hates poor people, well everyone else, because we are better than them aren’t we? Calling someone poor has become an insult, because we wouldn’t be human if we didn’t categorize everyone and tell ourselves that we are better. Although I have learned that some people live on welfare and “take advantage” of its benefit, by not looking for a job, but seriously people if you led a life where you have to depend on small portion of money from welfare, would you be happy?.As Sam said, it’s all about luck, I could have been Obama’s son and could have been an instant millionaire the second I was born but that’s not the case, I am just less fortunate, and I have to work for my own money.
[Reply]
I think that Andre Bauer owes everybody who he offended an apology. However, I don’t believe that he can ever be forgiven for what he said. A statement such as his is much too serious to be misinterpreted. He meant what he said, and by apologizing for his words, I believe that he realized the severity of his statement. Some people can be forgiven for what they say when there is reasonable confusion, but I find it hard to believe that Bauer accidentally commented about people using the welfare system. Many people use welfare as a means of getting back on their feet. Most people know that many individuals abuse the program that is active, but at the same time, many do not. I think that Bauer used poor judgment when speaking about this issue.
[Reply]
I have heard people use the word “animals” to refer to poor people or people on welfare. This outrages me. A lot of the time it’s not in their control whether they want to be on welfare or not. In this economy more and more people are losing their jobs and are not able to afford to take care of their families. It’s not their fault. I am not saying that everyone on welfare are not taking advantage of it, because I have come in contact with many people that do. But I am saying that these people should not be looked down upon and called “animals”. They are human beings and should be treated as one. It’s interesting to think about the rich receiving subsidies. You never hear about it in the media so it has never really crossed my mind. No one considers them “animals” so what gives? I think that maybe the media should put more emphasis on rich people receiving subsidies to show that people on welfare are not doing anything wrong. The article posted within the blog was disgusting. The statements that Bauer made were vile. How can one look so down upon another and say that they are stray animals and are just going to breed more stray animals. That is a sick way of thinking. I somewhat feel that Bauer’s apology was sincere. He was talking about the way his grandmother referred to poor people. If I read this correctly I do not think those were his actually thoughts. I think I agree though when Bauer says that welfare recipients should be required to take drug tests. That would weed out the people who deserve and don’t deserve welfare. Maybe I should say something else though because that sounds harsh. I think if there was drug testing the people who test positive should be able to receive some sort of help. People involved with drugs are not necessarily bad people, they just need someone to step in and help them. I do not think that people on welfare should be required to attend parent teacher conferences if they have children. I think it’s something that should be encouraged but I do not think that’s a big part of telling whether they are a good parent or not or if they deserve to be on welfare. Some people are not as well off as others and people need to accept it. People need to start accepting the fact that sometimes people need help and it’s not because they are lazy or not willing to try hard. Maybe welfare needs stricter laws as to who will be able to receive it. As a college student I am not well off right now and I would hate to be called an animal.
[Reply]
When I read this article, all I could think was wow… I couldn’t believe that someone like him would say such a thing and to be a politician at that, the people who should know the most about the welfare system and how it is solely to help people out. What really baffled me is the fact that he was talking about people and referring to them as animals. I bet if he looked deep in his family there is probably someone who has received welfare at least once in there life. So it makes me wonder who was he talking about?
[Reply]
I think it is very sad how these people that are receiving welfare checks are being called such names as "animals". I do think that all of being on welfare has to do with choices that were made early in a persons' life, but that does not mean that they are animals. One thing that I do not agree with is that some of these people who are on welfare and receiving support are using this amount of money to buy things that are not necessary to living everyday life. They are using it for their big screen television sets, their video gaming systems, their iPods and many other things that most of us would not consider necessities. It is sad when I go to places such as walmart and these people have so much in their carts that is not needed. Yes, I understand that their children needs a few toys here and there to play with and keep themselves occupied, but they do not need these movies and expensive gaming systems that their parents are buying for them just because that is the latest trend. I, along with the rest of the people across this country, have money taken out of our paychecks in order to support these people that do not have jobs. If you physically are not able to hold a job, then I am totally fine with having a small amount taken out of my check so that you can eat dinner every night and such things like that. But, I don't agree with these people going out to dinner at restaurants that they can not normally afford just because they are simply to lazy to have a job and want everything to just be handed to them. That is not how things work in the real world, but just because they are lazy does not mean that they should be called "animals".
[Reply]
At first when i heard this i thought it was some joke on a slip up or a line taken out of context. Then, when i heard what the man was saying i was shocked. Living in a neighborhood that is very far from wealthy, it was a necessity to have free lunch. When i started highschool in 2005 there were two lunch lines, one was for half priced lunch and the other was free. When i graduated there was one free line. By comparing to animals his metaphor implied that he wasent going to feed in order to eliminate. Now what kind of country do we live in that politicians want to kill off other people due to a lack of "success"
[Reply]
This is ridiculous. Andre Bauer should not be excused for the comments he made. He is a politician and always in the spot light. He did not just "accidentally" misuse the word. Politicians practice their speeches far in advance and know exactly what he was going to say. Many politicians even have people there helping them with their speeches. It is completely ridiculous to call people on welfare animals. These people do not choose to be in the position they are in. They don't like living with the bare minimum that the program grants them with. Politicians need to think more before they speak, because unlike some people, what they say is heard by everyone, and ultimately scrutinized.
[Reply]
Andre Bauer is simply just another typical politician who said the wrong thing to the wrong person. No matter what kinds of apologizing he does, it is evident that he probably expressed exactly how he feels about that those who are on welfare. In a political culture where people will twist their words to become “politically correct” to get votes, this does not surprise me. I’m sorry that Lieutenant Governor Bauer feels this way because you would hope that a person of his stature would have more respect for the constituents that he represents.
It is true that the disparity between the upper and lower class in the United States is very distinct. I am not sure that it is big enough to compare those who are on welfare to animals but who am I to say otherwise. The funny thing is though that I am pretty sure that many who receive welfare would feel just as comfortable calling Lieutenant Governor Bauer an animal as he did to them.
We live in a world full of ignorant individuals, and all it takes is for one (such as Lieutenant Governor Bauer) to express their feelings to make heads turn. While not many people would have the audacity to let something like this slip out of their mouths, I believe it is a good thing that he said it. The fact of the matter is that until we break down the “barriers” that have been setup by a fear of hurting others feelings and actually talk about our differences as human beings than we will continue to struggle to coexist in the same society.
I believe the government needs to spend more time taking care of those who receive welfare and assist them to lose this “animalistic” status. We have a multi trillion dollar budget (so it seems) yet we struggle to find the money for those who are struggling. It is a lot easier to call someone who is financially lesser than you a silly name than it is to go out of your way to physically assist them. That being said, I hope that Lieutenant Governor Bauer can learn a lesson from his mistake. While there is a good chance that his public apology was a fabricated sentence put together by his public relations person, we can only hope for the latter.
Lieutenant Governor Bauer’s call for mandatory drug testing and parent teacher conferences is a bold idea. While it is clear that his intentions are to only better the lives of his constituents, I believe these demands are a lot to ask. Those on welfare struggle enough to make ends meet, so I am not too confident these demands are realistic.
I hope that as a society we can learn from the Lieutenant Governor’s comments.
[Reply]
To generalize that ALL welfare recipients are "animals" is bad and hopefully if statements like this continue from this guy he will be voted out of his job. What comes around goes around. HOWEVER, I will say this. Those people out there whom are knowingly fraudulently exploiting the system are "animals". They are sucking up the resources from someone else who may be in real need of the very assistance that they are stealing. That is barbaric and as a taxpayer it really ticks me off! I, myself have had to utilize programs like medical assistance and "WIC" at one point in my life. It was extremely helpful and I do believe that these programs are desperately needed. But I used it for what it was intended for and that was to pick me up and improve my situation! Because of that help I was able to get myself to a position that I no longer needed the assistance and now am responsibly paying the taxes to continue these very programs.
The welfare abusers are what scares me the most about the idea of universal health coverage in this country. Currently, we have a system in place that is able to be penetrated by these animals and that is our own fault! We set up the system – we should have figured out by now how to prevent them from capitalizing. If we can't set up a system that is bullet proof from these animals what makes us think we are capable of setting up a universal (MUCH MUCH LARGER) health care system?
Just my opinion and I have no problem calling these people animals because that is what they are!
[Reply]
Of course I think Mark Sanford's constant were immoral and insensitive to say the least. I look beyond his ill choice of words and poor metaphor to figure out what his point was. Sanford was trying to make a point about responsibility and the on going cycle of government dependency. OK, point taken. Sadly, this is not Sanford's first downfall, and even after this mishap he will still how a good following. There is a lot of money behind him. Shows just how immoral and awful people find his comments. So the message is to 'think before you speak'? Most people may think after what has happened to him he would be more censored, but maybe he thinks he can get away with anything?
[Reply]
The remarks made by Andre Bauer directly relate to our class discussions regarding free will versus determinism. I am almost positive that Mr. Bauer sides with the free will explanation and completely denies the determinist theory. Mr. Bauer and those who only accept this view are simply ignoring the facts. No one can actually believe that children, as Sam mentioned, can control the family they are born into, the level of education they receive, or the financial stability of their situation. When someone explores this idea, there is no way they can only accept the free will theory, they must at the very least accept that social structures have some impact on human poverty, education levels, and overall “success”. How can a person advance in life when they can barely fulfill their basic needs, can barely afford food every week? Moreover, how can children who are worried where their next meal will come from, focus on long division and state capitals? The answer is, they cannot. Most children on welfare come from families who cannot satisfy their basic needs, welfare and food stamps supplement this requirement. Now I am not for enabling drug addicts or others who abuse the system, but I believe as human beings it is our responsibility to take care of others in need. The structures and constraints created by our society have created a situation where as Sam describes the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor. I believe the most influential social structure which impacts our society is education or lack thereof. The education systems in most urban and rural areas in America are atrocious and embarrassing. As the leader of the free world, we do a horrible job of educating our young and an even worse job at educating the poor. Without education there is no chance to improve social status. Take my father for example. My father was born in a housing project in urban Philadelphia. My grandparents however worked hard to send him to a catholic school. My grandfather worked three jobs at once to afford the tuition. At school my father excelled in classes and extracurricular activities and ultimately earned a full academic scholarship to college. Without his catholic school education and his scholarship my father would not have been able to afford college and might never have left the housing project he grew up in. My father’s situation does not only support the determinist theory, it actually blends the two. His experience describes what can happen when social structures, a proper education system, allow the disadvantaged to succeed. His experience also points to his own free will and the motivation he and his parents displayed to advance their social status. In closing, I would like to convey that I do not agree with either theory entirely, rather I accept a combination of the two which has created the inequality in our country.
[Reply]
Keep in mind that this is the same man that took numerous trips to South America to visit mistresses. Yet he is still in office. Don’t we have any standards with our politicians anymore? It seems like weather you have an R or a D next to your name determines what punishments you will have to take if any. The fact is, politicians everywhere are not being held accountable for their actions at all. The fact that the senate majority leader got away with little coverage from the liberal media, and faced no consequences for his actions is absolutely scary to me. What ever happened to the day when politicians were held accountable for their actions? Even John Edwards was thought to be a prestigious politician, and a man that seemed he would never do anything wrong. In fact, this was far from the truth because Edwards himself had a mistress while is cancer stricken wife was receiving treatment. What has this country come to? It seems like our liberal society has seemed to destroy our country indefinitely. I think a huge indicator that our society has changed for the worse is our acceptance of gay marriage. I believe in equal rights for everyone, but this just seems to be totally morally wrong. For over two hundred years, we viewed marriage as a civil union between a man and a woman. The thought of a man marring a man is just sick in my view. More things preach against gay marriage including the bible, but yet some protestant churches still preach for it. I don’t understand the idea at all. If a man and a man get married, they can’t have a kid. Which is one of the key reasons why couples get married. Even if they adopt a kid, he or her would be ridiculed throughout their scholastic career. You can’t even establish a set of family values or have a mother or father figure if there is a child in same sex couples. How would the child be brought up religiously? The child wouldn’t even be accepted into most religions. In fact the religions that do accept gay families mostly practice underground and are equivalent to polygamist cults in my opinion. What is the point of rebellion in a society? Why can’t people just live normal lives in normal families? I don’t under stand the principal of gay marriage at all. Sure gay people should have rights, but having them marry each other legally is taking it way too far. This country should take a stand on marriage, that it is only between a man and a women. If your parents were Mr. and Mr. Smith, how would you feel?
[Reply]
brownsugarr Reply:
February 13th, 2010 at 5:27 am
Governor Mark Sanford made trips to South America to visit his mistresses, not Andre Bauer, the man in question. Gays shouldn't be allowed the right to marriage? The problem with that lies within your definition of a "normal family". What are the qualifications for "normal"? If you could write me a rubric for "normalness" what would it include? White? Middle-class? Bible bent? Heterosexual? Simply because you yourself don't understand the principle of gay marriage isn't sufficient enough reason to dismiss a group's right to choose their spouse, right to love, and right for that love to be formally recognized by the government. What specifically is "morally wrong" about the acceptance of gay marriage? A marriage by definition is a civil union between two people; the sex of those people is not denotatively specified. It is inherently assumed; grounds which are not sufficient enough to impose upon others legally. Since when is it a requirement that a child be brought up following the creeds of a specific religion?
[Reply]
KWO5020 Reply:
February 13th, 2010 at 10:31 am
…I fail to see the connection between gay marriage and a politician having a mistress, especially considering said politician is a heterosexual male. “I believe in equal rights for everyone, but this just seems to be totally morally wrong.” I think that invalidates believing in equal rights for everyone. People consistently use the Bible and religion to back why they’re against same-sex marriage and it never fails to confuse me. Separation of church and state? Also, should we start basing civil rights on what makes people uncomfortable? Let’s not allow certain groups to get married because so and so feels it’s wrong, let’s stop letting this group vote because we don’t feel comfortable with them in power.
I think it says a lot about a person when they’re against rights for all simply because they don’t see it as normal. Can normality even be defined or is it just what you think is right or wrong? I’m glad many countries don’t have such backwards opinions on homosexuality and allow these couples to get married. As for would I be proud to have Mr. and Mr. Smith as parents? I’d be glad to have parents who didn’t force such close-minded views down my throat.
And yeah, it was Mark Sanford, not Bauer who made trips to Argentina to see his mistress.
[Reply]
Wait. Rich people get government subsidiaries? What for?! Their brand new Mercedes Benz? Why do they need my taxpayer money? WHY?! That really burns me up that Rich people get welfare. They don’t need it! I can understand some government subsidiaries for corporations as thousands, if not millions, of people if a major company went bankrupt… but the very wealthy get free money? That does not make any sense at all. I’m sure that Sam is right in that most people do not know about the whole, “rich people get tax payer dollars” thing, too… I sure didn’t know.
But back to what this politician said: what the hell? That is a terrible analogy and amazingly insensitive! I understand the point he’s trying to make, “Some people abuse welfare and spend their Government Issue money illegally,” but why couldn’t he have just said that? Instead, he attacks the poor and makes a gross overgeneralization. Yes, I do believe (scratch that, I KNOW) that some people do abuse their welfare checks and breed for the sake of the money. But that isn’t the case for everyone who applies for welfare.
A lot of welfare recipients are really down on their luck and they need that money to survive. Growing up on the streets of Philly showed me the good, the bad, and the ugly. Some people are parasites that probably shouldn’t be getting welfare. Some people made a few bad decisions and are now working multiple jobs at minimum wage to support a family that’s breaking apart. Some people are even so poor that they are so desperate as to turn to a life of crime just to survive. To say that they’re all bad and they’re all parasites is ignorant.
But let’s assume for a moment that Mister Bauer didn’t make such a terrible metaphor and that he said exactly what he meant: Drug tests and parent-teacher conferences? Not all people who abuse their welfare checks spend it on drugs. And what the hell are parent-teacher conferences are supposed to accomplish when you’re on welfare? From what I remember, public schools are funded by the state and are open to anyone, not just welfare recipients. So I don’t quite understand why they need to attend parent-teacher conferences. Public schools also aren’t particularly known for their excellent facilities and superb teaching staff… So exactly what is the point?
Also, has anyone noticed how it is only the people that are found saying these amazingly ignorant things are clichéd condescending Republicans? Not to say that the Democrats don’t have their fair share of faults, but it seems that whenever a Republican is in front of a camera and is talking about social issues, they say the most terrible things and demonstrate the most outdated and backward thinking ever. It’s almost as if they are assuming their constituents are all ignorant and are acting on being bigots with a much larger vocabulary than the average racist.
[Reply]
This really parallels to Sam's demonstration of King of the Mountain. Bauer is a product of his relatives, as he directly admits when quoting his own grandmother. Bauer is a person that is at the top of the mountain, who cannot relate to those below and will degrade them in order to prevent them from getting to where he is. I think that it is largely unfair to consider anyone receiving some form of welfare an "animal". What about students receiving federal financial aid? That is different form of welfare, but those people would surely not be considered "animals". In fact, most of those students would likely be called "middle class".
[Reply]
I feel that he had a good analogy but there was a bad delivery of his idea. It comes off as him saying we should not help the poor so they cannot prosper and have children. I mean he has the freedom of opinion but if it is something that his constituents do not agree with then he is probably not going to get re-elected so I would not worry about that.
I mean if I had made that comment I would have said that people are like strays, because they are a product of their environment. If a stray got thrown out on the street I would not keep feeding it I would take it to someplace it could be helped. I’m not saying that we should put all the poor in one place. I think that care should be taken to ensure that they can get back on their feet and live a joyful life just like When you send a stray to the SPCA you send it in hopes that it will be taken care of so much that it can be adopted to a family and live a joyful life. I think that these programs are sometimes abused by a minority of people, but we should not punish everyone for the actions of a few. I think that with welfare its giving a lot of people a second shot at life that they would not have gotten if it was not there. When the auto industry started to fall out many unemployed used welfare not because they did not want to work but because they had no place to work in that field. Like a stray they have no control over the environment and bad things can happen that you cannot possibly have no control over (car industry trends).
I mean that everyone is where they are today because they were helped. Not necessarily by welfare but by someone other than yourself whether it is your family or a friend. I think that everyone deserves to have a second chance.
[Reply]
After reading this post and the article attached to it, I'm not surprised that this happened even though I think it is an awful event. If I was a passenger on this plane, I most likely would have been scared as well if someone took something out of their carry-on and strapped it to ourselves. I do understand that this is a religious practice and we all have the right to believe and practice whatever religion we want, but after 911 I think people should be more aware of what is going on. If I was this kid I would be hurt a lot if this happened to me especially when all I was trying to do was pray, but I think he should have been a little smarter about the situation and about taking something out on a plane and attaching it to yourself.
[Reply]
Although we often see many politicians and media members messing up and saying something they really didn't mean I feel that this comment from Andre Bauer truly reflects on how he feels about the poor in our nation. Much like Don Imus's famous comments about the Rutger's girls basketball team revealed that he was definitely racist. I feel that there are a lot of people who abuse the welfare system in our country but it seems that he was referring to the truly poor and homeless people as the 'animals' and not those who are simply cheating the system. Especially the comments made about enabling them to breed leads me to believe that he thinks of them as inferior individuals who need to be weeded out. These comments were completely out of line and I think their is no way he should be elected to public office.
[Reply]
Honestly, Andre Bauer’s comment was absolutely ridiculous. The main thing that upsets me about what he said was that fact that he implied the people that are on welfare are animals. Bauer can feel however he wants to feel about welfare and government assistance but he definitely crossed the line with that comment. As a politician you should know when what you’re saying is inappropriate and you should know when to be politically correct. He probably thought that using the metaphor about the not feeding would help make his argument but all it did was insult a whole group of people. He made a huge generalization about people without knowing their situation. Andre Bauer has probably never even met a person who is in a situation where they need some kind of government assistance. He’s probably never been to poor neighborhoods to see the kind of living situations these people live in so it puzzles me that he is so eager to criticize.
I know that there are just because you are receiving assistance that you are lazy and just want to live off the system. Yes, welfare does help families but they are getting just what they need to survive and I don’t think that many people on welfare are complacent with where they are socially and economically.
Professor Richards brought up an interesting point when he mentioned the wealthy and their subsidies. Even though they are the elite of our society, they still benefit from our government in some way, but they would never think twice about their actions. I think its easier for the wealthy to point fingers at poorer citizen who receive welfare than to come to terms that they are not that different from each other in regards to government assistance. In my mind this all stems back to classic conflict theory; the elite have the power and help shape the norms. They’ve used their status to portray people on welfare as lazy individuals who would rather leech off of the government instead of working hard. So in the end I think the anger should be directed to the system that we have and some people out there who abuse government assistance and probably don’t need all of the help that their getting; however, there are far more people that actually benefit from the services. It really upsets me when people look down on someone because they are on welfare to support their family. Its sad to me that people assume that not Andre Bauer because he got his ideas from the people around him.
[Reply]
Okay, yeah it is ridiculous what this guy said, like common they obviously aren't animals. But none the less, some people who are welfare need to get off their couches and get a job. I understand that there is problems with unemployment, but maybe you should have gone to college and actually worked for a good salary. And the ever so common, "Well i grew up poor and couldn't afford college and didn't get good grades in high school and oh poor me." Well… maybe you should have tried harder in high school and got student loans and went to college instead of having 12 children and doing nothing on everyone else's tax dollars that we work our asses off for. Like honestly, Im a poor college student just like the rest of you and every pay check of like 350 dollars I get 50 taken out from taxes. And i work 35 hours a week and I am a full time student as well. I am frustrated and SICK of hearing everyone complain that they can't do it because its too hard. Well I get decent grades, and I pay for my apartment, food and everything and I don't complain. This girl came into Mclanahans the other day and said, "I'm on welfare to pay for food because I can't work even though i have so much time and my parents could afford to pay for food." I was like why the hell are you telling me this. It's just frustrating for the working people who actually need that money to live when these people on welfare are abusing what they get and doing nothing with their lives. Okay I'm done ranting now.
[Reply]
What are we supposed to do with morons on the planet earth? This is what makes life fun even though many are disturbed by the comments, and rightly so. We look at animals in a different light, as they have souls and are part of mother nature, but some humans' do not have souls. It's a shame to hear such ridiculous notions from a man of " high prestige". Politicians will do anything to save the ass of themselves in the end. Welfare is definitely a good, and progressive thing for SOCIETY. Society is so hell bound on blaming the lowers for the misfortune of the world, but yet it's the lower that does the work for the higher class to BENEFIT. To benefit people must step on the lower and make them feel horrible as people. I think many in this class are seeing a lot of these issues for the first time while some of us have seen this going on for years. My group had this discussion of who is the first person in your mind when thinking of welfare, and it's rather simple, that is black people come to mind. Is it right? No, but is it what the media and surrounding forces LEAD us to believe? Well yes. Everyone has a choice in life to think how they would like, but outside forces absolutely control how many think. They are too weak to think otherwise on their own. Sam pointed out in class that if he picked any black person and asked who was rich they immediately go to a white person. Is that racist? maybe, but it might be just the product of what society keeps implementing on human beings, and not animals. The media wants to treat us like animals because they see us as just eating off the scraps that the government gives us. Fuck them. I mean really who are these highfalutin dickwads to keep pointing out how bad everyone else is, when in fact they are the worst of all of society. Many want to blame societal issues on the lower and middle classes when the higher classes are rewarded for beating down on the "inferior" classes!!!! It's funny that he says the welfare people are animals while he's ninety six percent monkey himself the dickface. The end of this post is to say how people don't want to look at themselves when problems, but rather blame the "animals" for gathering what the higher people actually invented FOR the "animals" so they could be elected. It comes down to power and the realization of many that people are just pawns for the higher order to move around to checkmate society in the way they see fit.
[Reply]
I'm getting mixed ideas from some people who are deserving of welfare struggling through certain obstacles like having enough money just to get by but no enough to afford adequate health care (which is a big issue by the way). But i know that some people on welfare checks are extremely rich, but I do see how that can be quite a large problem especially if the money went towards something useful. But people like that octomom who just had eight children and decided to keep them all instead of using selective reduction to risk not only the children's health but also decrease the state funding her weekly checks for the kids. I see no way that she should be on welfare because of her kids, i mean i got nothing against the children born into that position but some people are just stupid.
[Reply]
This must outrage republicans. A politician could do nothing worse that speak this way about human beings. People like Bauer are those bad people that remind us of the racism that still goes on in this country. The racism that we have been desperately trying to move away from. He is an embarrassment to all Americans. He is an embarrassment to the United States that people like this are in power in the government. He is the type of person that should drop into Sam Richard’s race relations class so that he can be easily enlightened on social issues such as these. It doesn’t seem right that I group of 700 plus students with understand social inequality in the United States better than a South Carolina politician. Bauer apologizes for being out of line and letting his emotions get the best of him, a politician like this should not be able to let his racist feelings take over. Bauer was most likely born into a wealthy family where he has had nothing to worry about but making speeches to sway people into electing him. What does he know about the struggles impoverished people must fight through to survive. He has most likely been handed everything and he is trying to keep medicine from those people that have had to fight for everything they have ever owned. I cannot comprehend how someone so stubborn and bias can make it to power and be preaching to citizens of the United States. You would think that Bauer would be smart enough not to insult so many people when he is soon to be running for another position, which I hope he is not elected to. The man is an embarrassment. It seems that South Carolina cannot catch a break, the Mark Sanford scandal, now the brutal remarks of Andre Bauer. I don’t see how this man could gain respect around other politicians or another human being for that matter. How sad would it be to be a person in the United States receiving welfare and hearing that a leader in your country used a metaphor saying that he would like to cut off your food so that you would die and not reproduce. How could he try to cut off the hope of the people that need it most, to break through the struggle that has been keeping them where they are now. More than anything Andre Bauer’s remarks are un American. He pray he is not re-elected and for that matter anyone that has similar qualities. This type of person is the man that should be struggling to survive, so that he can see the difficulties that one must overcome. He should see that in many circumstances assistance is needed when everything is not handed to you.
[Reply]
I am so surprised to hear that someone could say this in front of thousands of people in an speech to the public, and think that there would be nothing wrong with what he was saying! Not only saying it but feeling it. Of course some people may abuse the welfare system but as a country we need to try and help our fellow citizen in their time of need. Why would he want millions to go without food because they do not have enough money to keep food on their tables? And many times when it comes to food stamps and government aid, the person needs to have a job to be able to receive the benefits. And as Sam said a lot of these people in need are children, who unfortunately have no choice.
Being on welfare is not a badge of honor for most people. It is embarrassing and a let down to their self esteem and self worth. I wonder how this man would feel if he had exhausted all other options and had to apply for food stamps? Probably not good, and not like an animal. Many times people would go pretty far if it was just them that they had to worry about but a lot of these people have mouths to feed so they need to make the decision to take government aid.
I work at a grocery store and everyday i have at least 10 customers that use access cards. Many times they don't tell me they are going to use it. they take it out of their wallets, quickly swipe it, and put it away. They try and make it a secret and they feel ashamed. Needing help should not be something to be ashamed about. Sometimes life sucks and it tries to knock us down and we need others to help us back up. No one knows how they feel unless they walk in their shoes. Maybe they just lost their job, they have three kids to feed and their wife no longer has her job and they have bills to pay. Most, if not all of their funds are exhausted on everything else they are required to pay. What are they going to do, let their family starve? No they are going to ask for help and feed their children. Bauer should probably put himself in these peoples position before he flaps his lips.
Sam is right, its one thing to think that these people are animals, but to tell everyone else that is looking to you as a prominent public figure is ridiculous. He loses credibility and followers. Next time he wants to say something, maybe he should just shut it.
[Reply]
This whole situation has really surprised me! Why in the world would he compare people on welfare as stray animals in an alley? The fact that this metaphor would have actually popped into his mind is baffling to me. It is absolutely unacceptable and ignorant for him to say this statement, primarily because he has no idea about each individual story of the families on welfare. However, I am still a little confused about the statement that Sam made about how we all collect on welfare subsidies in of some sort. Is this whole situation based on welfare as like a general term? I get that lobbyists argue for money for their respective organization or department, so are we just talking about that we all use that money in one way or another. Are we actually taking the welfare money from the true intention of why that supply really exists? If somebody could clarify this for me, I would really appreciate it.
I also would like to comment on Andre Bauer’s sorry excuse for an apology. Where does come off thinking that he just wished he used a different metaphor? This nation is one of the richest nations in the world and we cannot just go around letting people dying in the streets. Is Bauer proposing some sort of a survival of the fittest mode? Only the strong survive? This reminds me so much of the lecture yesterday, and how Sam talked about how if you start off at the top of the mountain, it is so much easier to stay at the top. Also, what does he propose we do about this situation if he does not like welfare? We are a democracy, so we cannot exactly just enforce a one -child rule or anything like that.
Lastly, what does Bauer mean about how welfare recipients being required to take drug test and attend parent-teacher conferences? I can almost see at least his reasoning behind the submitting to drug tests, not saying I agree with it by any means. But, why in the world would he think that recipients would need to go to parent teacher conferences? Is this just because he thinks that parents need to make more of an effort to be involved in their children’s lives? If so, that is by far just as outrageous as the animal statements? Why in the world would he think that people on welfare do not have any interest in their family? Some families just do not have the resources to live in the Unites States’ high standards of living. It really offended me when I read that statement; because to me, there is absolutely no correlation between your income and how you raise are capable of raising your family. For me, I think that Bauer has a lot more apologizing to do.
[Reply]
It’s great that in our discussion groups we are encouraged not to hold anything back and to say whatever we are feeling, but this article shows that in reality everyone has to be careful what they say. While his remarks were completely out of line, he was speaking his mind and unfortunately offended many people. I’m sure his comments, although harsh, were not intended to offend anyone.
People must live their lives with this filter on what we say. It is very unfortunate that we must do this, but many people are very sensitive to certain issues therefore we don’t talk about them to avoid offending them. This seems to be the main topic of the class as Sam and out section leaders are always talking about speaking our minds and not holding back. The discussion group has been amazing so far. Everyone seems to be speaking freely about a variety of issues and no one to my knowledge has been offended so far. I’m talking about this because I wish the world worked the same way as our group. I wish everyone could talk freely and openly about controversial issues so they can be resolved. The world wastes so much time and energy arguing about the proper way to address those of a different race when we could so easily come together and decide. Obviously this isn’t a logical or feasible solution to the problem, but when I see strangers in a discussion group come together to talk about these issues, I wonder why it’s so hard for everyone else.
Sam makes a great point when he says it’s something that people sometimes think but can never say out loud in public. There are some comments that will offend everyone all the time and this is one of them. Bauer completely dissociated those people from the rest of humanity, and completely embarrassed them. I’m sure Bauer is embarrassed himself as he should be, but that doesn’t excuse such a huge slip.
Andre Bauer’s comments were completely inappropriate, and would be under any circumstances, but it will be interesting how long it takes for such comments to be a thing of the past. I sincerely hope there comes a day when people can learn to come together to figure out all of our differences. It’s impressive to see how far we have come as a civilization, but scary to think about how much farther we could be if it weren’t for some pointless fighting amongst ourselves. I hope in a future discussion we can talk about why we are able to speak so freely around one another and yet many people have such a hard time doing so around others.
[Reply]
This all goes back to how ignorant politicians are. I don't care how authoritative, wealthy or educated you might think you are, no body has the right to call another person an animal. That is completely out of line and disrespectful. You may have had the golden ticket to your success while they have been struggling and cannot find other means but to ask for government help. So I don't see how that is a reason for someone to be called an animal. Sure there are some who take advantage of this great program but that still does not justify them as animals.
I think welfare should have better ways of giving out money. They should give these people jobs to do and then pay them rather than just issuing checks because they applied. If that can be done and is stabilized, it will eliminate those who are just being lazy and selfish.
[Reply]
All I can say about this article is "Ignorance", sheer ignorance. This guy has been so misinformed in his like its actually sickening to think he has some say in our government. Some people just don't get it. After reading this article and understanding that everybody receives some sort of welfare in their life just makes him look even worse. Welfare is something that helps out people that are less fortunate in this country. There is no reason to look and single out the recipients that are poor and think of them as animals. You don't know their situation, and you don't know them personally, so for you to come out and insult people that are less fortunate is immoral.
[Reply]
What an appalling and absurd thing to say. As a politician, one of your key goals is to make sure that you are representing your constituents and those who voted you into office in a positive light. Lieutenant Governor Bauer’s words don’t only make already-embattled Governor Mark Sanford look bad, but reflects poorly on the Republican Party and those that he represents.
Sure, it was probably a misstatement. But, in the context of the quote, it could have been what Bauer honestly believed toward those people who are collecting welfare. The whole Republican Party and the “conservatives” have made it their goal for a very long time, to discourage the government from providing essential benefits to those citizens who find themselves facing financial hardships. Yes, this is probably an extreme case of such views, but, these words and similar rhetoric from members of the far-right are simply getting out of hand. I love how the Republicans like to call Democrats and Obama elitists when you see some on the far-right exhibiting much more elitist views, such as the one discussed in this post. What’s most disgraceful about Bauer’s comments is that he most likely comes from a very wealthy background and had everything given to him his whole life on a golden platter.
Talking down on people, whom, many of which are ashamed at having to collect welfare, from his “high-horse” is shameful and selfish. I mean, calling these people who collect welfare “animals” is bad enough and then describing them as people who “will reproduce, especially ones that don’t think too much further than that” really dug Bauer in a hole. It’s important to note that some of these people who collect welfare are middle-class working Americans who have been laid off due to the difficult economic conditions and are collecting welfare in order to survive and feed their children and family. Many of these people are no different than us in what they pursue in life. They want happiness, and good health for themselves and their families. Additionally, collecting a small sum of money from the State each month as they try to get back up on their feet is not asking too much.
The Lieutenant governor, a person who is meant to represent the people of his State, poor or rich, should, above all, acknowledge that. It is pretty clear to me: Bauer should not be elected to Governor after making such comments. He completely insulted many of the struggling working-class Americans who elected him to high office. What are the poor in Georgia to think? That, because many of them lost their jobs during the recession and are not as privileged as others such as this Lieutenant governor, they should not be assisted by the state in any way, shape, or form because a greedy and somewhat rude politician doesn’t believe they should? Absolutely not, and electing this man to governor would be a bigger disappointment than his poor choice of words and that he should have “used a different metaphor.”
[Reply]
After reading this article, I have mixed feelings. I am surprised a politician said something like this. It is his job to win over the public opinion, not turn half of them against him. I agree that this man is wrong in comparing people, those on welfare, to animals. No one should be compared to an animal, especially poor people that sometimes cannot help the position they are in. Being called animals is derogatory and not the way to address a serious problem in today’s economy. I think this politician has a good idea, but he should have considered carefully the way he portrayed his opinion. I think he made a mistake with these remarks; however, I am sure that he is strongly feeling the reprocutions or will be soon. I think he could have handled this in a much different way because this is a serious issue.
I am from right outside of Baltimore, Maryland, one of the worst cities in the United States when it comes to drugs, violence and homelessness. I know what it is like to be in bad neighborhoods frequently. I will not compare myself in any way to anyone that lives in Baltimore city, but I can relate to these issues a lot better than some people who live in better neighborhoods can. I have been subjected to the bad ways and people in this city through my own family and experiences of friends so I will not stick up for those people. I do believe that some people deserve the life they live. I believe some people could make something of themselves if they wanted to or if they tried. I think there are opportunities that are passing by that these people do not take. Why? Because of welfare. I watched a wealthy, clean suburban neighborhood become taken over by the state government to be allocated as welfare housing, or as it’s called, Section 8 housing. I am not trying to make any stereotypes but this once nice, safe neighborhood has transformed into a less safe environment with the neighborhood quality deteriorating. I am in no position to say that some of these people truly need welfare housing and help, but at the same time, from my family's own personal experience, I can tell you that some people only want one thing and one thing only- money. They will take advantage of all the rights they have and turn them against people who are trying to help. They abuse the privileges given to them. I think this is a serious issue that needs to be considered by Politian’s everywhere. I think that something must be done to weed out those simply abusing this privilege and who are milking it for all that its worth. At the same time however, I think this needs to be dealt with in a delicate way because this is a sensitive subject to some, especially to those being called "animals."
[Reply]
I absolutely agree that people say these types of comments all the time. Nobody thinks twice when it’s just, as Sam put it, a guy on a bar stool but people pay attention to what political people, celebrities, and anyone in the spotlight says. Especially someone like Andre Bauer who is looking to run for higher office, people are going to pay attention.
I think it is totally disrespectful to call people animals. We actually had a guest speaker in one of my classes today that spoke about child poverty and in relation, the welfare system. I learned a lot I didn’t know about welfare and that I think a lot of people, especially ones who bash the system, don’t know. There are many requirements to even be considered for the system because help is not universally available to all poor people. People who want to attain welfare must make between four hundred and eight hundred dollars a month and have at least one child. So right there is Sam’s point that the welfare is really going to the children, or it is hoped it is. The checks that these people are receiving is only three hundred to seven hundred dollars, so for people who think people on welfare are lazy they aren’t. Why would they quit their job, even if they’re only making minimum wage, for three hundred dollars? And this isn’t based on how many members there are in the family. People on welfare must report to their case workers that they’re spending twenty hours a week looking for a better job or higher education. This is outside of their job and taking care of their children. In this way, the welfare system is emphasizing work and employment skills, not laziness. Finally, if the participants haven’t begun to work again (if they have been laid off) within two years of receiving benefits, they are cut off and you may only remain in the system for five years TOTAL LIFETIME. These people don’t get that much time to get back on their feet. The only change that might be made in my eyes is for the social workers to do a better job of monitoring what the money is spent on so that they’re sure the money isn’t getting wasted on unnecessary things.
I think the current welfare system is on the right tract to helping families out who need it and are trying to turn their lives around, especially for the children. These children are the future and 40% of children are in low-income households in the United States. These kids need help to live a productive life and a positive future. On a minimum wage job there is no way a parent is going to be able to pull their family out of poverty without a little help.
[Reply]