Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Why do people insist on creating an argument that wasn't made and then arguing against themselves?
This is his argument. Not mine. I believe that he needs to explain how it functions.
As he said:
Democrats stole the black vote, in the continued effort to dominate and control them, continued from the slave days.
...
They have used the black vote ever since to enslave them.
...
So they broke their families and gave them benefits to keep them reliant on government.
How do these unnamed Democratic Party operatives do those things?
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: It's the oddest thing. Canpakes, it's pretty clear SPG thinks the Democrats induce the Black vote by 'hooking' them on welfare, so that they're dependent on the Democrats to get handouts.
1. How did they qualify for welfare in the first place?
2. How do those wiley Democrats keep them from earning enough to
leave the system?
3. How do Democrats use mind-control to force blacks into this addictive cycle of wanting free money above any other option?
Seriously, lets explore the issue.
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:(stats from source)
The black population: At 41.6 percent, blacks were more likely to participate in government assistance programs in an average month.
Hispanics at 36.4 percent
Asians or Pacific Islanders at 17.8 percent
Non-Hispanic whites at 13.2 percent.
Nearly 42% of a population using welfare is an astonishing figure, and despite Leftists constant mewing about institutional racism being the cause, SPG probably thinks welfare creates a culture of poverty and entitlement.
1. Are Democrats making welfare
unavailable to Asians, Pacific Islanders, Hispanics or non-Hispanic whites? Or setting a different qualifying income level for those groups?
2. If those groups have members within them that have used government assistance, how are they able to escape the machinations of wiley Democrats and subsequently able to free themselves from the
evil mind controlling forces that hold blacks in thrall to continued dependence upon welfare?
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:He's free to clarify, of course, but let's not do the EA thing and just invent crap out of whole cloth and then declare victory when he successfully argues against himself.
On the contrary, I don't seem to be inventing anything. I am questioning a rather provocative claim that seems to imply some grave process of control that remains unexplained outside of merely claiming it exists, perhaps strictly for partisan political reasons.