How Democrats used federal tax dollars to produce a wave of black criminals

If you're a college-age American you've probably never heard of Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" or "War on Poverty" programs.  You need to know about 'em, cuz they're a key to why so many once-great U.S. cities have turned into murderous cesspools.

For the last half-century the U.S. government--on the order of Democrat pols in congress and the White House-- has spent over $25 trillion dollars (and counting) on welfare programs collectively known as "the Great Society" and the "War on Poverty."

Those programs created a welfare state not even remotely envisioned by the Founders.

The bitter irony is that the so-called War on Poverty actually produced poverty.  Within one generation, the government welfare programs destroyed the classic "nuclear family" and substituted government as the source of life.  You need to know how this happened, because that's the only way you'll have a chance of stopping it.

The problem started after the end of World War 2.  Young Americans today know almost nothing about World War 2, but it was viewed as an "existential war," meaning if we'd lost, our way of life would have been destroyed.  It was a *very* close call, but thanks to unbelievable amounts of sacrifice and hard work, the Allies finally won.

After the end of WW2 Americans were on a huge high: most believed we could do virtually anything.  (That's the spirit that got Americans to the moon just 24 years after the end of the war.)  This confidence was particularly strong in liberal Democrats, thanks to president Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was elected to 4 terms, followed by his former VP, Harry Truman.  So Democrats had a lock on the presidency for 30 years.

There's a famous saying:  Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

America had always been built around the "nuclear family:" husband and wife.  Everyone knew that kids raised by a single mother were far more likely to not become good citizens.  Because the percentage of single mothers raising kids was higher among blacks (roughly 15%) than among whites, liberals (Democrats) decided to use the virtually unlimited power of the federal government to "fix that."

As the Dems saw it, the problem was NOT with single moms trying to raise kids, but rather that the mothers' incomes were lower than white, two-parent households.  Using the same reasoning that drives all Dem programs, Democrat activists and pols said it "just wasn't FAIR" that this difference in income existed.  And the clinching argument was that innocent black kids were suffering, through no fault of their own.

So as you already guessed, the Dems proposed to "fix" this was, they'd give the single mothers federal tax dollars.

Problem solved, eh?

Normally such simplistic, superficial, flawed "reasoning" would have generated heated debate, and the bill would have had a much harder time becoming law--but a million-to-one event changed everything:  the assassination of president John F. Kennedy in 1963.

College-age Americans who pay attention know that the Mainstream Media are total supporters of Democrats, and lie brazenly, shamelessly, whenever it helps Dem pols or causes.  In the 1960 election--Kennedy versus Richard Nixon--it was even worse:  JFK was the handsome, Harvard-educated son of a fabulously wealthy, politically powerful Massachusetts family.  He was elected president at the young age of 43.  (Compare to FJB, who's 78.)

The Media adored him and his attractive, elegant wife, and worked tirelessly to get Americans to share the Media's total adulation for JFK.  The media elites were quite happy to ignore JFK's numerous affairs.  They even had a name for the Kennedy White House:  Camelot.  

That name wasn't a play on JFK's notorious sex appetites, but invoked the legendary reign of King Arthur and his knights of the round table.

Seriously.  I am NOT making this up.  If you wanna see, take a look at how slobbering the Wiki entry is for the guy.

So when Kennedy was shot, the feeling of loss you'd expect was multiplied a thousand-fold by the Media.  The new president--Kennedy's VP, Lyndon Johnson, realized that as long as the public had this media-hyped devotion to the slain president, it would make it possible for the Democrats to pass laws that normally would have been almost impossible to pass.

The result was a tidal wave of--as the federal HHS bureaucrats describe it at this link-- "cash welfare payments for needy children who had been deprived of parental support or care because their father or mother was absent from the home, incapacitated, deceased, or unemployed."

The above quote--from HHS itself--shows how cleverly the plan was laid.  Key terms: "for needy children."  Needy because their father was either "absent from the home" or unemployed.  Nothing else was needed.  This was the weapon that would destroy so many black families--which in turn would create so many young black criminals.

It's also worth noting that congress cleverly gave the cash to the states (including DC, Puerto Rico, Guam (!) and the Virgin Islands (!!) ) instead of setting up yet another federal bureaucracy.  This ensured the states would want the program to continue forever--which has proven true.  Once states begin getting federal tax dollars for anything, they always want those dollars to keep flowing.

It took the black community about an hour to figure out that you could only get this extra cash if the baby-daddy was either gone or unemployed.  And the rest is history.

For decades feminists have bleated that kids don't need a father in the home--a theme totally supported by the Media with the success of a TV series about a glamorous 35-ish woman "investigative journalist for CBS" (actress Candace Bergen) who chose to have a child without ever being involved with the father.

The elites heaped praise: "Bold!"  "Inspiring!"  "Trail-blazing!"

The series ran on CBS for ten years and won 47 awards.  And I've read the phrase "Murphy Brown showed..." dozens of times in trendy liberal mags.  Cuz to liberals, TV IS reality.

Starting to see how it all fits together?

No one denies that single moms are nurturing and that most work hard and raise good, successful kids.  The problem is that gangs and the drug culture has made that far harder even for two-parent black families--and exponentially harder for single mothers.  When you remove the economic benefits of the nuclear family-- specifically removing the father from the scene-- most discipline vanishes.  While mom can certainly teach right from wrong, there's no muscle to penalize wrongdoing.

That guarantees that more minority males will become career criminals.  Add the race hustlers like Al Sharpton, Farrakhan, Ibram Kendi, Nicole Hannah-Jones and top Democrat pols and you end up with more young males who hate and resent their situation--and blame whites.  The race hustlers encourage that, in part because it increases their income.  $20,000 per speech.  Encouraging people to hate America is very profitable.

To summarize:  Liberals, no doubt with the best of intentions, proposed programs they claimed would single mothers, by giving them cash.  To qualify for the most cash, you couldn't have dad in the home.  

These programs almost certainly wouldn't have become law except for the assassination of the media-beloved Democrat president, and his successor's realization that he could use the wrenching event to pass laws on the Dems wish-list.

Very clever.  Cunning.  In fact Johnson was caught on tape saying that if his proposals passed, "I'll have those ni***rs voting Democrat for the next 200 years!"

Smart guy.  But the price was terrible--and as you're starting to see with the mobs looting stores in Democrat-ruled cities, it's now starting to get much, much worse.

Now, how many of you think this devastating new trend will reverse itself in your lifetime?

==

https://aspe.hhs.gov/aid-families-dependent-children-afdc-temporary-assistance-needy-families-tanf-overview