Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<I am also very surprised to hear that I am a Republican. Silly me. I guess the (D) beside every name (except one) that I voted for last November must have meant "Damned Republican" instead of "Democrat" like I assumed.>> Oh my bad. You're not a Republican. You're a DINO. At the end of the day, same diff.
Originally Posted By mele I dunno, skinner. RT has some very liberal views on some things, others...not so much. Don't most people? He and I have agreed more than disagreed (I think. LOL).
Originally Posted By skinnerbox I know, mele. But geez. How much longer before somewhat intelligent people wake up and realize that things are sliding downhill very rapidly now? RT is acting like one of those head-in-the-sand Republicans regarding this issue. And just because something doesn't get reported in the MSM doesn't mean it doesn't exist or didn't happen. That's at the core of Project Censored and why the program exists: <a href="http://www.projectcensored.org/" target="_blank">http://www.projectcensored.org/</a> Corporate news outlets are never going to report on news items that interfere with their business agenda. Newsrooms are now profit centers. And they'll never remain as such if the news that they report would upset the profitability of their parent companies and corporations.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>And just because something doesn't get reported in the MSM doesn't mean it doesn't exist or didn't happen. << However, if you read the actual bill and it ain't there either ... <a href="http://tinyurl.com/4gvqxo7" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/4gvqxo7</a>
Originally Posted By RoadTrip << How much longer before somewhat intelligent people wake up and realize that things are sliding downhill very rapidly now? RT is acting like one of those head-in-the-sand Republicans regarding this issue.>> If you had lived in Minnesota for 55 years like I have you would know that it is highly unlikely that even Republicans there would attempt something like was reported. Yes, Minnesota is home to that idiot Bachmann. But it is also home to Keith Ellison, the first Muslim Congressman, Senator Al Franken and the late Senator Paul Wellstone. Bachmann comes from a very conservative district in Minnesota that is quite unusual for the state. You may have a lot of "book-learnin" in psychology, but you know absolutely NOTHING about the historical political context of Minnesota. You aren't near as damned smart as you think you are! I'm not saying it didn't happen. I'm just saying I'm not jumping to conclusions until I have a reliable information source. Who's the smart one now?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Bachmann comes from a very conservative district in Minnesota that is quite unusual for the state. << You mean planet. ; )
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<Ah, here we are. Nothing here about carrying more than $20: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/bin/bldbill.php?bill=H0171.1.html&session=ls87 I'm sure the Welfare Rights Committee does good work, but I really don't see where they're getting this. Someone please explain?>> Sure. Try reading these paragraphs from your link more closely: "(a) Electronic benefit transfer (EBT) debit cardholders in the general assistance program and the Minnesota supplemental aid program under chapter 256D and programs under chapter are prohibited from withdrawing cash from an automatic teller machine or receiving cash from vendors with the EBT debit card. The EBT debit card may only be used as a debit card." OK. The general assistance recipients are given these debit cards that cannot be used to withdraw cash from ATMs. "(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), EBT cardholders may opt to have up to $20 per month accessible via automatic teller machine or receive up to $20 cash back from a vendor." So the recipient may opt to have UP TO $20 cash per month from an ATM or a participating vendor. UP TO $20. No more. Honestly... what were you reading? This is clear as day. The Welfare Rights Committee nailed it. This new bill only allows the assistance recipient to receive his monetary help through these debit cards which can only be used at participating vendors. And these cards will only give the recipient UP TO $20 in cash each month. And none of these vendors are out of state, nor are they located in all parts of Minnesota. So not only is the state of Minnesota telling these people how to spend their money, they're also forcing them to spend it at specific locations with specific vendors they deem worthy to participate in the program. And if the people on assistance wish to use this money for public transportation in trying to find a job in another part of the state, or purchase non-food items necessary in their job searching, like a haircut or new clothing, they're out of luck. These cards are only for food and personal necessity stuff like soap and shampoo. Good luck trying to even go to SuperCuts with $20 cash. Welfare Rights Committee is correct. This is criminal.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip OK... now I see the difference. Your initial link was to the bill as originally presented. Your second link was to the "first engrossment" version of the bill, which has amendments that have been attached to the bill. You and I BOTH know that amendments are frequently attached to bills by BOTH sides that have no chance of passing just to make political statements by minority positions. To present this as something being seriously considered by the Minnesota Legislature is deceptive at best.
Originally Posted By fkurucz "Corporate news outlets are never going to report on news items that interfere with their business agenda. Newsrooms are now profit centers. And they'll never remain as such if the news that they report would upset the profitability of their parent companies and corporations." Which is why I don't even bother getting my news from the MSM. It's our version of Pravda.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>So not only is the state of Minnesota telling these people how to spend their money, they're also forcing them to spend it at specific locations with specific vendors they deem worthy to participate in the program. And if the people on assistance wish to use this money for public transportation in trying to find a job in another part of the state, or purchase non-food items necessary in their job searching, like a haircut or new clothing, they're out of luck. These cards are only for food and personal necessity stuff like soap and shampoo. Good luck trying to even go to SuperCuts with $20 cash.<< All true. By definition. The cards are INTENDED to be for food and personal necessity stuff, not for a haircut or new clothing. They can't spend this government assistance money on whatever the heck they want to. If that's what you're upset about, then so be it. But how does this relate to someone who has $21 on them, with the extra $1 from another source like odd jobs, or can collecting, or another welfare program? It doesn't. This is what I'm talking about. This sort of hyperbole drives me bananas regardless of which side is doing it. That amendment does NOT outlaw carrying anything. All it does is say you aren't going to be able to get more than $20 cash from this particular program. There's an ENORMOUS difference between these two things.
Originally Posted By Tony C The op is wrong. There is not a war on the poor in Minnesota. There is a war on the poor and middle class in America.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<To present this as something being seriously considered by the Minnesota Legislature is deceptive at best.>> Are you freakin serious? For the first time in 38 years, the Minnesota State Legislature is now controlled by the Republicans. The November 2010 election swept in a bunch of tea party full mooners, several of whom wrote these pathetic amendments. You think for one minute that these amendments are not going to pass in the legislature? With the tea party Republicans now calling the shots? Gov Dayton will probably not sign these into law, but then again, he just might. Many Dems aren't acting particularly progressive these days.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip There is NO WAY Dayton would sign it into law. The very fact that he was elected shows that Minnesotan's are not about to turn total control over to the Republicans. I don't know if you know much of Dayton's history, but he is by far the weakest candidate to become Minnesota governor since Jesse Ventura. He was elected because he is a Democrat and for no other reason. His record in the Senate was a joke and an embarrassment. Minnesota is still a Blue state, and nothing some proposed amendment to a bill says will change that.
Originally Posted By fkurucz "The op is wrong. There is not a war on the poor in Minnesota. There is a war on the poor and middle class in America." Sorry, did you say something? I was too busy watching "Dancing with the Stars".
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<There is NO WAY Dayton would sign it into law. The very fact that he was elected shows that Minnesotan's are not about to turn total control over to the Republicans.>> If that is truly the case, then why did they turn over the state legislature to the Republicans for the first time in 38 years? Not to mention that Dayton won by less than one-half of one percent over the Republican challenger, Tom Emmer. It's not like Dayton has a solid mandate from the constituency. Dayton probably won't sign the bill, or at least he will use the line item veto where appropriate for garbage like this. But don't be so certain that Minnesotan's aren't fool enough to turn over the rest of their state to the Republicans in the next election. Wisconsin got fooled into voting for their lying Republican politicians, and will course correct with recall elections this summer. Polls are showing very strong support for ousting three of the six Republican State Senators who barely won their elections by very slim margins. With those three replaced with Democrat challengers, the State Senate will revert back to Democrat control and Walker will basically twiddle his thumbs until he's recalled in January. But Minnesota doesn't seem to have the backbone to support their Democrats as strongly as Wisconsin is now supporting theirs.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Sorry, did you say something? I was too busy watching "Dancing with the Stars".<< Now now, it's not that bad. Knut the polar bear dropped dead a few days ago and nobody seems to have noticed.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<But Minnesota doesn't seem to have the backbone to support their Democrats as strongly as Wisconsin is now supporting theirs.>> Weak slam. Try better, mouse man. You don't see Republicans even TRYING to abolish unions in Minnesota, do you?
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Dump on frigging Missouri all you want. BUT LEAVE MY MINNESOTA THE HELL ALONE!!
Originally Posted By skinnerbox They would if Emmer had won. And he very nearly did. The only reason you don't see the Republicans in Minnesota going after the unions or any group which supports the Dems, like we're seeing in Wisconsin, is precisely because Emmer is not Governor. If he was, Minnesota would be waging an even stronger war on the working class a la Wisconsin, Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio. That's a given.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Frankly, the fact that an idiot like Dayton could win against anyone who is breathing is a miracle. Minnesota had enough of Republican governors after plenty of pain Pawlenty. Otherwise Dayton would have had no chance.