Julia: Obama's Entitlement Darling

I would like to thank the Obama administration for validating the premise of my last column (“Our Entitlement Addiction”). In case you forgot, in the column I declared that today’s poster children for our Entitlement Society are the two recent winners of million dollar lotteries in the state of Michigan—Amanda Clayton and Leroy Fick—who enthusiastically continued receiving their state welfare after winning their fortunes.

However, it seems that President Obama has awarded the Entitlement Society poster-child job to “Julia.” With their moronic "The Life of Julia" slideshow, the Obama administration paints a perfect picture (a "clear manifestation" if you will) of the entitlement culture they wish not only to maintain, but amazingly, grow.

In the sideshow—I mean slideshow, we first see Julia at age three enrolled in the pre-k Head Start program. Head Start, which began as part of President Lyndon Johnson’s Entitlement Society—I mean Great Society, is a “Great” example of a federal program that we pour billions of taxpayer dollars into, that accomplishes almost nothing it set out to, and will be virtually impossible to get rid of.

Time Magazine’s Joe Klein said last year that after 45 years, “We spend more than $7 billion providing Head Start to nearly 1 million children each year. And finally there is indisputable evidence about the program's effectiveness, provided by the Department of Health and Human Services: Head Start simply does not work.” In other words, children who attend Head Start perform no better than students of similar income and social status who did not attend.

Like so many other government “programs,” Head Start has devolved into a jobs, healthcare, and childcare “program,” and thus its continued popularity. Many liberals even acknowledge this. “The argument that Head Start opponents make is that it is a jobs program,” a senior Obama Administration official told Klein, “and sadly, there is something to that.”

Julia then embarks on her K-12 academic career, where the federal government has had about as much success as it has with pre-k. According to the Cato Institute, since 1970, while inflation-adjusted federal spending for 17-year-olds (as Cato notes, “The final years of high school are the decisive ones…”) increased nearly 200%, math, reading, and science scores were virtually flat-lined.

We are then told of how Julia benefits from the fruits of Obamacare, which includes remaining on her parents’ insurance until age 26. Just what our youth need—further motivation to put off adulthood and responsibility! Finally able to stand on her own at age 27, Julia is thankful that Obamacare requires her health insurance to cover her birth control. Of course, there is no mention of marriage or a husband.

But there is mention of a child. We are told that at age 31, Julia decides to have a child and that “Throughout her pregnancy, she benefits from maternal checkups, prenatal care, and free screenings under health care reform.” In this one sentence we get the clearest picture of the absurd liberal mindset. Because of her government (especially President Obama), Julia is the beneficiary of “free” health screenings. There is no mention of any costs; no mention of taxes or who exactly is paying for Julia’s “free” screenings.

As she nears retirement age, Julia also is able to take advantage of Medicare and Social Security. This is encouraging news for all of us, because by this time Julia has reached her mid-sixties (This puts us around the year 2075.). Given that both programs currently have well over a hundred trillion dollars in unfunded mandates, and neither party seems serious about significant reforms for either, I will be very exited to see President Obama’s plan to ensure that both are still around as we approach the 22nd century.

There is plenty more in the life of Julia that reveals her dependence on her government. In fact, throughout her sad life she never really grows up. She is revealed to be little more than a child nursing on the big bosom of the state. Is this really how the Obama administration sees women? Where is the feminist outrage? Then again, she does fit the bill when it comes to modern feminism; all that is missing from Julia’s sorry existence is a couple of taypayer–funded abortions!

Now that Mitt Romney has a virtual lock on the GOP nomination, the 2012 presidential campaign is officially underway. “The Life of Julia” is one of the first salvos in what is sure to be a brutal campaign. Romney has got to be encouraged. With more efforts like this, he will have very little to do to show undecided America Obama’s vision for the future. I just hope that there aren’t too many Julias out there who vote.

Copyright 2012, Trevor Grant Thomas

At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

NC Poised to Protect Marriage

The state of North Carolina votes tomorrow on whether to amend its constitution to define marriage as a union of one man and one woman. North Carolina would be the 30^th U.S. state to so amend its constitution. The most recent poll shows support for the amendment with a 16 point lead (55% to 39%). I’m hoping for at least a 60-40 victory. As it is looking more and more likely that an amendment to the U.S. Constitution is going to be necessary to protect the definition of marriage, this would be another encouraging turn of events.

Our Entitlement Addiction

Never has there been a clearer manifestation of the absurdity that our entitlement culture has wrought than what occurred recently in the state of Michigan—not once, but twice.

For several months after winning a $1 million state lottery jackpot, 25-year-old Michigan resident, Amanda Clayton, collected thousands of dollars in state assistance. Clayton reportedly received approximately $5,500 in food stamps and public medical benefits. She was exposed by a Detroit news station, WDIV-TV4, in March and has since been arrested for welfare fraud. 

When confronted by the Detroit station and asked if she felt that she had a right to the money, Clayton replied, “I mean I kinda do.” She further added, “I feel that it’s okay because I mean, I have no income and I have bills to pay. I have two houses.” Clayton then declared that she intended to continue to use her benefits until she was cut off.

Perhaps Ms. Clayton learned her trade from 60-year-old Leroy Fick. In June of 2010 Fick won $2 million in a Michigan state lottery TV show. In May of 2011, the Detroit News noted that, according to Fick’s attorney, Michigan’s state “Department of Human Services determined he was still eligible for food stamps.”

The News also noted that, “Eligibility for food stamps is based on gross income and follows federal guidelines; lottery winnings are considered liquid assets and don't count as income. As long as Fick's gross income stays below the eligibility requirement for food stamps, he can receive them, even if he has a million dollars in the bank.”

Fick declared, “If you're going to try to make me feel bad, you're not going to do it.” His attorney added, “I am not going to sit and debate the ethics of this…from his standpoint, he did what he was supposed to do -- he informed the state, and the state said he could keep using the card. The problem is with the state.”

No doubt that “the state” has its problems. Among them is the fact that it has created generations of entitlement leeches who are so embedded that, even when they come into a fortune, they are loath to be removed from their bloated (yet bankrupt) host.

Not only are Mr. Fick and Ms. Clayton guilty of defrauding the taxpayer, they are an example of the worst kind of greed. Other than get “lucky,” neither of them did a thing to accumulate their wealth. Yet they continued unapologetically to seek more through other means that would again require them to do almost nothing. They are the poster children for an entitlement society.

Certainly not everyone who receives government assistance turns out like these two. How could they? I mean, the number of million dollar lottery winners is, by definition, quite small. Thus, very few would ever even have the opportunity to be as lecherous as Fick and Clayton. Sadly, however, I’m afraid that there are far too many who would choose the same path.

Also, note the logic of an entitlement driven government. Michigan has since changed its law, but how asinine is it that, after winning his millions, Mr. Fick was still eligible for government assistance?! I suppose that if he won $10 million he would have immediately been eligible for his Social Security benefits and private lessons from the Secret Service on how to obtain the best available local prostitutes!

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) just published some interesting data and graphics. It reveals that in fiscal year 2011, the U.S. federal government spent $3.6 trillion while taking in $2.3 trillion. Of the $3.6 trillion spent, $2 trillion was “mandatory” spending that includes entitlements. In fact, the vast majority of the “mandatory” spending was for Social Security ($725 billion), and healthcare (Medicare/Medicaid $856 billion).

Also, the CBO estimated that one in seven Americans received food stamps last year (and one in ten said they would give them up if they won the lottery!). The CBO concluded that the number of Americans receiving food stamps would continue to grow until 2014.

The reason that automobile giants GM and Chrysler went bankrupt in 2009 is that they had, for the most part, ceased to become car companies and had instead become pension and healthcare providers for millions of Americans. (See my column here.) The U.S. federal government is not only a pension and healthcare provider, but it also has massive housing, food, and child-care programs as well.

What’s more, most of these programs are quite popular. Too many Americans love their entitlements and have a difficult time giving them up (see Fink and Clayton), or even accepting the slightest reforms. This is one reason many liberals want to see Obamacare implemented. Once an entitlement begins, ending it is harder than keeping Keith Olbermann happy.

Thus, not only do conservatives have the task of reining in current entitlement programs and preventing new ones, but also of changing our very culture. The U.S. literally can afford nothing less.

(See this column on American Thinker.)

Copyright 2012, Trevor Grant Thomas

At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

My Easter (Resurrection Sunday) Column

At this time of year Christians celebrate Easter, or as I prefer, Resurrection Sunday. As one scans history, no other date put such a mark in time as when Jesus Christ shed His grave-clothes and departed the tomb.

Of all the religions of the world, only Christianity claims an empty tomb for its founder. The physical resurrection of Jesus is the cornerstone of Christianity. British theologian Michael Green said it well when he noted, “Without faith in the resurrection there would be no Christianity at all.” Noted biblical scholar, professor, and author Wilbur M. Smith said that, “The resurrection of Christ is the very citadel of the Christian faith. This is the doctrine that turned the world upside down…” Indeed it did.

C.S. Lewis notes that, “In the earliest days of Christianity an ‘apostle’ was first and foremost a man who claimed to be an eyewitness of the Resurrection,” or more accurately, a witness of the resurrected Christ. He adds that, “to preach Christianity meant primarily to preach the Resurrection.” And preach they did.

The transformation of the disciples of Jesus is one of the greatest evidences of His resurrection. For decades following Jesus’ death and resurrection they preached His “good news.” Biblical references and strong extra-biblical sources have almost all of the disciples dying martyrs’ deaths. James, the son of Zebedee, according to Scripture was, “put to death by the sword (probably beheaded).” According to early church historians Peter was crucified in Rome, and Paul (of course not one of the original 12, but an apostle nonetheless) was beheaded there. Strong church tradition has Thomas, the “doubting” disciple, being run through with a spear.

The manner of martyrdom of the other disciples is less clear, but strong evidence suggests all, save John, died horrific deaths because of their faith. Their unwavering efforts spread the gospel to many regions of the world, including Rome, Greece, Armenia, Persia, Syria, India, Egypt, Libya, Arabia, and North Africa.

The faith of Jesus’ Apostles spread to thousands upon thousands in a relatively short period of time. Many of the early believers suffered intense persecution as well. Fulton Oursler, in The Greatest Faith Ever Known, notes that “Thousands of these men and women would die themselves in the arena, burning on pitch-soaked pyres, crucified, they would die for Jesus Christ, and for the Faith, the Church that Christ founded.”

The persecution of the church continued for centuries. After Constantine’s conversion in the year 312 the church passed from persecution to privilege. Councils were called, the Scriptures were translated into various languages, and missionaries carried the gospel to ever farther reaches of the world.

The influence that Christianity has had on the world can be measured in practically every facet of life. Everything from the family, to science, government, medicine, art, literature, business, and so on, has felt the impact of the message of the Resurrection of Christ.

The world’s first university, birthed in 1088, was The University of Bologna in Italy. It was founded to teach canon law. The second oldest university, The University of Paris, grew out of the cathedral schools of Notre-Dame and soon became a great center for Christian orthodox studies. Dr. Alvin J. Schmidt, in his book Under the Influence: How Christianity Transformed Civilization, points out that every college established in colonial America, except the University of Pennsylvania, was founded by some denomination of Christianity. He adds that, preceding the Civil War, 92 percent of the 182 colleges and universities in the U.S. were established by some branch of the church.

Many of the greatest artists in history: Rembrandt, Michelangelo, Donatello, Da Vinci, and Salvador Dali were Christians. This is evident in that many of the great works they produced were scenes or characters from Scripture. Beethoven, considered by many to be the world’s greatest composer, composed some of the most profound Christian masterpieces of history. Johann Sebastian Bach was, as one scholar put it, indeed “a Christian who lived with the Bible.”

Take note of the number of influential charities inspired by Christianity. Among them are The Salvation Army, Campus Crusade, Catholic Charities, Habitat for Humanity, and the YMCA. Also, about 25% of U.S. hospitals are Christian.

The great nation that we inhabit was founded almost exclusively by Christians and upon Christian principles. The United States has become perhaps the most influential nation in world history. Standing for freedom and justice and operating out of love, this nation, whether through its government or private citizens, has come to the aid and rescue of billions of people around the world.

The current year is 2012. This is not 2012 years from Caesar, Buddha, or Mohammed, but from the birth of Jesus Christ. Dan Flynn notes that, “The attempt to replace Anno Domini (AD) and BC (Before Christ) with BCE (Before Common Era) and CE (Common Era) is yet another exercise in futility. Doesn't this Common Era, after all, begin with the life of Christ?”

The impact of Christ’s resurrection can be seen in institutions and nations, virtually every facet of life, as I said earlier, but I think it is most noticeable in the lives of individuals. We may measure our years from His birth, but our hope is in His resurrection.
(See this column on American Thinker.)

Copyright 2012, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Obamacare a Political Loser for Democrats

Whatever the Supreme Court decides on Obamacare, President Obama
and the democrats will be the loser. If the Court strikes down Obamacare (as it
should), it would reverse the signature accomplishment of the Obama presidency.
Obama will then be justifiably labeled as having been the architect of one of
the greatest (if not the greatest) assaults on individual liberty in U.S.
history, and his critics will have the U.S. Supreme Court decision to back that
argument.

If Obamacare is upheld, conservatives will then turn to the
electorate and say, “Again, the courts let us down!” From the decision day to Election
Day the GOP will run ads declaring that the only way to then reverse the wildly
unpopular bill will be to elect republicans.

(This will probably be the topic of my next column.)