Welcome to Obamaland: Food Stamp Recipients Outnumber Women Who Work Full-Time, Barack Obama … The Food Stamp President
Welcome to Barack Obama’s ‘Hope & Change’… welfare instead of jobs.
What happened to the country I grew up in, the Food Stamp edition. Since 1969 there has been a 1,552% increase in food stamp recipients. ARE YOU KIDDING!!! There were only 2,878,000 people on food stamps in 1969 as compared to the current 44,758,000. That is simply astonishing and unsustainable. The number of food stamp recipients has increased so much, that for 2012, the number of people participating in the food stamp program outnumbered the women who worked full-time, year-round in the United States.
Check out in the chart below the vertical red line increase of food stamp recipients since Obama took office in 2009. They don’t call Barack Obama the Food Stamp president for nothing. His moniker has been well earned. Also check out on the same chart the stagnate blue line of woman who work full time under Obama’s administration. This is Obamanomics and the real war on woman. Obama has been nothing more than an EPIC FAILURE!!! America, we better right this ship before it is too late.
People participating in the food stamp program outnumbered the women who worked full-time, year-round in the United States in 2012, according to data from the Department of Agriculture and the Census Bureau.
In the average month of 2012, according to the Department of Agriculture, there were 46,609,000 people participating in the food stamp program (formally known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). That contrasts with the 44,059,000 women who worked full-time, year-round in 2012, according to the Census Bureau’s report on Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States.
For each woman who worked full-time, year-round in 2012, there was slightly more than 1 other person collecting food stamps.
In 2013, the average number of people on food stamps increased to 47,636,000. The Census Bureau will not publish its report on Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage for 2013, which includes the data on women working full-time, until September.
The Department of Agriculture’s website lists the annual average number of food stamps participants going back to 1969. That year, there were only 2,878,000 people on food stamps. Since then, food stamps participants have increased by 44,758,000—or about 1,552 percent.
Protein Wisdom opines on some not so good coincidences between the Carter and Obama presidencies. Why exactly did you reelect this disaster?
For those into trivia, those three years (and 2013 is likely to join them as the fourth) took place under the Carter and Obama Administrations.
As did the ruthless arrogance of Muslim extremists and Communist Russians.
Again, probably just a coincidence — and even if it’s not, Obama’s reelection proves that women and minorities love them some other people’s shit, and don’t much care if that turns them, effectively, into slaves of the state. Because they’ve been empowered by “self-esteem,” which allows them to justify and rationalize away their own near-permanent state of being.
No one can say he did not get to his job approval rating the old fashion way … he earned it!
According to the most recent Gallup poll, 3 day rolling average, President Barack Obama’s job approval rating in back in the 30′s. Take your pick, the economy, record debt, record number of individuals on food stamps, failed green energy agenda, scandals like Benghazi-gate and IRS-gate, foreign policy disasters like Syria, Libya, the failed Arab Spring and the disastrous Russia reset and Obamacare … one wonders how Obama is not in the 20′s.
Democrats are panicking ahead of the 2014 midterm elections.
Posted March 15, 2014 by Scared Monkeys
Afghanistan, Barack Obama, Benghazi-Gate, Democrats, Economy, Egypt, Epic Fail, Food Stamps, Gallup, Green Energy, Healthcare, Healthcare.gov, Hope and Change, Iran, Iraq, IRS-gate, Islam/Muslims, Job Approval, Misleader, Misrepresentation, Obamacare, Obamanation, Polls, Russia, Scandal, Syria, The Lying King, Ukraine, You Can Keep Your Insurance | one comment
Former President Jimmy Carter May not be Dead, But his Presidency Was … Donald Trump Makes Reference at CPAC to the “Late, Great Jimmy Carter” … I’m Not Dead Yet!!! (VIDEO)
Former President Jimmy Carter needs to borrow a line from Monty Python and the Holy Grail … I’m Not Dead Yet!!!
It would appear that Donald Trump was a bit premature in announcing the death of “the late, great Jimmy Carter (VIDEO).” Yesterday at CPAC, The Donald compared the Obama presidency to that of the disastrous, failed presidency of Jimmy Carter. Trump stated that Obama’s job approval numbers at 38% were now in Jimmy Carter territory and that he never thought he would see another presidency like the late, great Jimmy Carter. Oops. Make no mistake, Jimmy Carter, 39th President of the United States has not passed away. However, Carter’s presidency was.
“We’re getting into Jimmy Carter territory, and I never thought I’d see anything like that again,” he said as the audience chuckled. “I lived through that time and it was not a good time and we’re pretty close – I think maybe by next month we will have surpassed the late, great Jimmy Carter.”
With Barack Obama’s failed foreign and domestic policies and adverse impact on America, it would look like from his falling polling number, Obama’s presidency is dead as well.
Fox News Poll: Barack Obama Hits All-Time Low Job Approval at 38%, 54% Disapprove … Only 33% Believe Obama has Improved America’s Image around the World
Barack Obama’s 38% job approval is well deserved, he did it the old-fashioned way … HE EARNED IT!!!
Can you say ‘EPIC FAILURE’ and it would appear the American people may finally be fed up with Obama’s disastrous presidency. According to the most recent Fox News poll, President Barack Obama has hit an all-time low in his job approval, as an anemic 38% approve of the job he is doing while a whopping 54% disapprove. But wait, a look inside the numbers and the news gets even worse for Obama and Democrats. Obama’s numbers on healthcare, the economy and foreign policy are abysmal.
Just how many Democrats are going to want this president near him during the 2014 elections?
For the first time in a Fox News poll, fewer than four voters in ten — 38 percent — approve of President Obama’s job performance. Fifty-four percent disapprove. Before now Obama’s worst job rating was 40-55 percent in November 2013. Last month 42 percent approved and 53 percent disapproved (February 2014).
Approval of Obama among Democrats stands at 71 percent, near its 69 percent record low (September 2013). For independents, 28 percent approve, which is also near the 25 percent all-time low among this group (July 2013). And approval of Obama among Republicans hits a new low of five percent.
Full poll results can be read HERE.
Most all of Obama’s poll numbers are now in the 30′s. Across the board whether it be domestic or foreign policy, Obama has failed. Now we can only hope America can survive another 3 years with this president.
- Healthcare: 36% Approve - 59% Disapprove
- Economy: 36% Approve - 58% Disapprove
- Foreign Policy: 33% Approve – 56% Disapprove
- Do you think the country is better off than it was five years ago, or not? 34% Yes - 60% No – 5% the Same
Wait, let’s try to find some good news for Obama and his lockstep Democrats in their poll. Oh sorry, there is none. On items that Americans were asked as to whether Barack Obama mostly succeeded or Mostly failed, Obama got an “F”. What happened to that president who said that he would make America respected once again in the world?
- Making the country safer: 41% Mostly Succeeded – 48% Mostly Failed (In Oct. 2012 Obama’s poll numbers were 52% – 38%)
- Improving health care: 36% Mostly Succeeded – 57% Mostly Failed
- Creating new jobs: 33% Mostly Succeeded – 59% Mostly Failed
- Improving America’s image around the world: 33% Mostly Succeeded – 59% Mostly Failed
Real Clear Politics Barack Obama average job approval polling.
OUCH!!! Sarah Palin Says Obama’s Perception is Weakness Across the World, “Putin Wrestles Bears & Drills for Oil, Obama Wears Mom Jeans, Equivocates & Bloviates”
It would appear that Ronald Reagan’s “Peace through Strength (VIDEO)” has been replaced by Obama’s Peace through “Mom Jeans”.
Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin loves to drive the LEFT insane. Last night with Sean Hannity to discuss the differences between between Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin. Also, how Obama could have got the situation with Putin so wrong. Palin stated that any one who carries the common sense jean realizes that Putin does not change his stripes, he harkens back to the era of the czars and he wants that Russian Empire to grow again. Then Palin came out with the money line:
“Putin wrestles bears and drills for oil, Obama wears Mom jeans and equivocates and bloviates!”
“Anybody who carries the common-sense gene knows that Putin doesn’t change his stripes.” Palin and Hannity agreed that when the U.S. can’t “feed others with our resources,” people grow more reliant on Russia’s resources and it emboldens them, which is why the U.S. should approve the Keystone XL pipeline. Vladimir Putin, Palin said, is viewed as a man who “wrestles bears and drills for oil,” while Obama’s “potency” is one of “weakness” and said he’s viewed as a man who “wears mom jeans and equivocates and bloviates.”
Hey Liberals, Remember When Sarah Palin Predicted in 2008 That If Obama was Elected President, Putin and Russia Would Invade Ukraine … SHE WAS RIGHT!
HEY AMERICA, HOW’S THAT “HOPEY-CHANGEY STUFF” WORKING OUT FOR YA?
Remember in 2008 when then GOP Vice Presidential nominee said during a campaign rally in a Reno, Nevada, “After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next.” Palin was mocked profusely for her comments by the Left and the liberal MSM. Flash-forward to present day … GUESS WHO WAS CORRECT? Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is now saying “I told you so” from her Facebook page following reports of a Putin – Russian “military invasion” in the Crimean area of Ukraine.
Um, I’m usually not one to Told-Ya-So, but I did …
Yes, I could see this one from Alaska. I’m usually not one to Told-Ya-So, but I did, despite my accurate prediction being derided as “an extremely far-fetched scenario” by the “high-brow” Foreign Policy magazine. Here’s what this “stupid” “insipid woman” predicted back in 2008: “After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next.”
With special thanks to JWF, they found this liberal gem from the past where Sarah Palin was mocked for her foreign policy comments regarding what would happen between Russian and Ukraine if Barack Obama was elected in 2008.
Palin helpfully offered four scenarios for such a crisis, one of which was this strange one:
After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next.
As we’ve said before, this is an extremely far-fetched scenario. And given how Russia has been able to unsettle Ukraine’s pro-Western government without firing a shot, I don’t see why violence would be necessary to bring Kiev to heel. Watch the upcoming parliamentary elections in December to see if Moscow gets the pliable new government it wants.
So where are all those Democrats, Libs and liberal media types with their apologies? Doesn’t it just crush liberals that Sarah Palin was more correct on Russia than their Obamamessiah.
Remember When Barack Obama Ridiculed Mitt Romney During 2012 Presidential Debates about Russia … ‘1980s Are Calling to Ask for Their Foreign Policy Back’ … How Do Those “Rose Colored” Glasses Fit There Barack?
Yet another reason why you don’t elect, let alone reelect SNARK or a Campaigner is Chief …
Remember when Barack Obama made the snide, wise-a$$, ridiculing comment during the 2012 presidential debates to GOP candidate Mitt Romney regarding Russia and that the 1980′s want their foreign policy back? And everyone thought Obama was so cute making such a witty comment. So what do you think of Obama’s comments now as Russia and Vladimir Putin have invaded Ukraine. Just curious America, how’s that “Hopey-Changey” stuff working out for ya? Where is your
Moses Obamamessiah now? By the way Barack, how do those rose colored glasses fit?
Fox News’ Bret Baier opened a segment of his show Friday night by flashing back to an October 2012 presidential debate where President Obama ridiculed Republican presidential nominee Romney about his concern over Russia’s “geo-political” threat.
“You said Russia. Not Al Qaida. You said Russia,” Obama said regarding biggest threats. “The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because…the cold war’s been over for 20 years.”
Mitt Romney’s intelligent, powerful and correct retort was as follows:
“Russia, I indicated, is a geopolitical foe … and I said in the same paragraph I said and Iran is the greatest national security threat we face. Russia does continue to battle us in the U.N. time and time again. I have clear eyes on this. I’m not going to wear rose-colored glasses when it comes to Russia or Mr. Putin …”
Is it any wonder why at this moment so many Americans wish that had a do-over of the 2012 presidential election and they would not vote for Barack Obama. He has been wrong and an epic failure on everything in be domestic and foreign policy. What else would you expect but snark from an individual who was completely unqualified to be president?
Charles Krauthammer Points Out the Hipocrisy & Lies of Obama/Democrats Increasing Minimum Wage … Obama’s Minimum Wage Plan Would Hurt Poor
Democrats and their hypocrisy with the CBO numbers and the very people that they claim to help.
Fox News contributor and syndicated columnist, Charles Krauthammer, appeard on the ‘Kelly File’ and shredded Barack Obama’s and Democrats claims that a raise in the minimum wage will help the poor. Krauthammer stated that this Democrat plan to increase the minimum wage to $10.10 to help the poor would hurt the very people that Obama supposedly intended to help. Krauthammer and Kelly both showed Obama’s and Democrat hypocrisy when it comes to dismissing the CBO’s evaluation of the minimum wage plan because it goes against their agenda.
However, Charles Krauthammer’s most important point and damning statement which is causing Dems to cringe was as follows: “Democrats like to redistribute income, and they pretend it’s always from the rich to the poor. What the CBO has shown, absolutely clearly, is that when you raise the minimum wage, you’re redistributing income from one set of low income people to another set of low income people.”
Krauthammer continued by saying that the math contradicts the Obama administration’s claim that it wants to help poorer Americans.
“We know that Dems like to redistribute income, and they pretend it’s always from the rich to the poor,” he said. “What the CBO has shown, absolutely clearly, is that when you raise the minimum wage, you’re redistributing income from one set of low income people to another set of low income people.”
And the damage will fall on those who are most economically vulnerable, Krauthammer said.
“There are going to be about half a million people who go from $7 an hour to zero,” he said. “They’re going to be destitute.”
Krauthammer finished by saying that raising the minimum wage would, in fact, have the reverse effect of its intention.
“The irony is, that the winners get a marginal advantage, but for the losers, it’s devastation,” he said. “This administration is robbing the people it says it really wants to help.”
Freedom of the Press? Not in an Obama World … The FCC Wants to Grill Reporters, Editors & News Station Owners About How They Decide Which Stories to Run
WHEN WILL THE TYRANNY STOP WITH THIS OUT OF CONTROL IMPERIALISTIC PRESIDENT?
It would appear that Barack Obama wants to put government FCC monitors in America’s news rooms to determine why media outlets cover certain stories. ARE YOU KIDDING ME!!! So now we are going to have government lackeys in news rooms to monitor and make sure that the media is covering the stories they want them to? Could Barack Obama and the Obama administration possible trample on the United States Constitution and Freedom of Speech any more?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
As reported at Mediaite, FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal bringing people’s attention to this study, saying “the government has no place pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.” And while participation is technically voluntary, ignoring them would not be a wise decision for any news outlet that wants an FCC license. We all know that the MSM is bias and pretty much in lockstep leans to the left, but it is not the governments job to interfere with what they report or how they report . “Participation is voluntary—in theory,” supposedly; however, the FCC’s questions, queries and interrogations may be hard for the broadcasters to ignore as it is this very government agency that could put a media outlet out of business if they spitefully withhold an FCC license. But of course the Obama administration has never gone after or targeted a specific group of people who opposed him, have they … IRS-GATE!
AMERICA, THIS IS WHAT TYRANNY LOOKS LIKE! LET’S JUST COME OUT AND SAY IT … THIS IS ANTI-AMERICAN. WELCOME TO OBAMA’S USS
An Obama administration plan that would get researchers into newsrooms across the country is sparking concern among congressional Republicans and conservative groups.
The purpose of the proposed Federal Communications Commission study is to “identify and understand the critical information needs of the American public, with special emphasis on vulnerable-disadvantaged populations,” according to the agency.
However, one agency commissioner, Ajit Pai, said in a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece Wednesday that the May 2013 proposal would allow researchers to “grill reporters, editors and station owners about how they decide which stories to run.”
He also said he feared the study might stifle the freedom of the press.
Who is Obama kidding?
This is just heinous as Obama uses the death of Daniel Pearl to make it appear that he is for Freedom of the Press
“Reminded us of how valuable a free press is.”
“reminded us that there are those who would go to any leangth in order to silence journalists …”
“A well informed citizenry that is able to make choices and hold governments accountable …”
Obama says, “Clear out the press so that we can take some questions”
Questions that the FCC poses in the study to news managers and staffers, including the following. Honestly, what business is it of the federal government?
- What is the news philosophy of the station?
- How do you define critical information that the community needs?
- Who decides which stories are covered?
- Have you ever suggested coverage of what you consider a story with critical information for your customers (viewers, listeners, readers) that was rejected by management?
What a shocker, President Barack Obama’s minimum wage economic policies look to destroy more jobs …
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released a report on the economic effects of Barack Obama’s proposal to increase the minimum wage from its present $7.25 per hour to $10.10. The CBO looked at two options. One, raise the minimum wage in three steps to $10.10 by 2016, and Two, raise it in two steps to $9.00 by 2016. In either option, the US economy either loses some jobs or many jobs, but make no mistake, they will lose jobs. The CBO announced that an increase in the minimum wage will cost between 500,000 and one million jobs. Basically, Obama and Democrats boasting about raising the minimum wage is nothing more than a distraction to their current political nightmare.
Well this does not fit the Obama/Democrat Talking points …
Once fully implemented in the second half of 2016, the $10.10 option would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers, or 0.3 percent, CBO projects (see the table below). As with any such estimates, however, the actual losses could be smaller or larger; in CBO’s assessment, there is about a two-thirds chance that the effect would be in the range between a very slight reduction in employment and a reduction in employment of 1.0 million workers.
As summed up by the PJ Tatler, the report in that there is one positive impact to raising the minimum wage, although one groups silver lining is another’s silver bullet. Is it really worth raising some out of poverty at the expense of even more people losing their jobs completely?
The CBO does find one positive impact: Raising the minimum wage would move some 900,000 Americans out of poverty.
But that would come at the cost of potentially sending a million workers out of jobs altogether. That’s hardly the goal that Obama and the Democrats are selling.
The Washington Times discusses Three ways that the CBO contradicts Obama on minimum wage. Imagine that, Obama lying?
- Obama: “The opponents of the minimum wage have been using the same arguments for years, and time and again they’ve been proven wrong. Raising the minimum wage is good for business, and it’s good for workers, and it’s good for the economy.”
- Obama: “Rais[ing] the federal minimum wage to $10.10 wouldn’t just raise wages for minimum-wage workers, its effect would lift wages for about 28 million Americans.”
- Obama: Raising the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour, “would lift millions of Americans out of poverty immediately.”
I have to ask the following parting question: How is it that Obama and his minions can tell us what the positive benefits will be to raising the minimum wage, but they can’t tell us to the person how many are 100% enrolled in Obamacare and have paid their first premiun when the data is on a database in front of them?