Monday, January 9, 2012

Why Do We Hear "Black People" When White People Mention "Food Stamps"??

Let's Get The Story Straight

Although I will agree that under this President that there are more people on welfare than ever before and that black people have been disproportionately effected. According to Fox News food stamp (EBT) participation and costs have risen under Obama, from 28.2 million participants at a cost of $37.6 billion in 2008 to 44.7 million participants at a cost of $75.3 billion last year, according to federal data of what is officially known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

This is Newt Gingrich's original speech referencing the food stamp issue at the Georgia Republican Party Convention May 13th, 2011. Proceed to about 14:40 & 19:30-20:05 & the kicker 26:20-27:30

Did you hear that? Amazingly, there was NO MENTION of Black people in this speech! NONE!

Then why did David Gregory in a May 15th 2011 interview on the issue, use Gingrich's after session of the above speech as a reference to suggest that Gingrich was using "racially tinged" language directed towards President Obama because Obama was the "first black President"?:

From a political standpoint we find that some of the problems with the expansion of food stamp benefits began in 2008 at the end of 8 years of a Bush regime. 

However, why was the media's emphasis on associating food stamps with special sensitivities with a black President? Further why is this an implication towards all black people? Are Black folk being played? How? Certain media personalities tell black people when to be sensitive to racial comments, because our President is black??? Could it be that the ones telling us that certain statements are racists are racists themselves? They are the one's who assumed that saying food stamps to a black president was "racially tinged" language. I don't assume that saying "Grey Poupon" to a white person is "racially tinged" language. How does talking about getting people off of food stamps apply to me in any way because I'm black?

Shamefully Uninformed     

Obviously some of our supposed black "leaders" buy into this sort of distraction and subversion rather easily. In fact either they didn't hear the speech for themselves or they simply believe what they want to believe or what certain white journalists tell them to believe. Dr. Ben Jealous, the former Boule leader of the NAACP (Not Actively Advancing Causes for any People) stated:
"It is a shame that the former speaker feels that these types of inaccurate, divisive statements are in any way helpful to our country,"..."The majority of people using food stamps are not African-American, and most people using food stamps have a job."
What is he saying? Did he even listen to the speech? It sounds like the tail wagging the dog. Gingrich didn't reference that  the "majority of people using food stamps" were black. He did draw the line regarding food stamps vs paycheck, however I consider that political speech to make an analogy.

Fact is that Dr. Jealous is almost right. He is correct in that the majority on benefits are not black. From the information available, the facts are these:
  • 34% of food stamp recipients were white,
  • 22% of food stamp recipients are black and
  • 16% of food stamp recipients are Hispanic
He is incorrect stating that "most people on food stamps have a job". It seems that only 41% of recipients lived in a household that reported "earnings". This is NOT a majority as he claims. Are his statements to be considered class condemnation statements? This is ridiculous. It just so happens that he is also wrong.

This Video, Touted As The Lynch-pin,  Is Gingrich In Response To The Criticisms From NAACP And Other Boule.

In RESPONSE to the complaint on the statements leveled by the NAACP and unlike former President Bush, at least Gingrich says that he will go to the NAACP membership if called and say exactly what he said and why he said it. Another lie was that he said all this on the same day...What are we doing??? The question is, are Boule Blacks ready to hear what Gingrich has to say? Will they allow Gingrich to explain himself? Or, does someone have a vested interest in keeping us confused and ill-informed? I think so.  



  1. Why do folk grandstand over this issue. This man didn't suggest, hint, or intimate that blacks on foodstamps was who he was talking about.

    I know the problem. The problem was that under Clinton the Republicans, led by Gingrich, demanded welfare reform.

    Now, some say that was a bad thing. I don't see it that way.Some of the atrocities up until that time were horrible. I personally knew some people who would have children every couple of years for an increase in checks. White and Black!

    I guess we think that money is a never ending resource and that it will never run out. Or maybe like President Obama, just take what we need from the rich, like a modern day Robin Hood.

  2. America is no longer a place where the majority of people think. It is much easier to wait until or favorite leader, politician, bishop puts their spin on the truth, tells me what I should think and feel, won't take the time to verify the facts. They leave the thinking to the experts, fly in a V-formation like the rest of the geese following blindly and stupidly.

  3. Cogicjustice,

    That is most certainly the truth. Let the facts speak for themselves. No need to trump up charges falsely.

  4. To show the utter need for politics on this issue, and to display exactly how the public is getting played on this, the criticism is that Gingrich, in his speech, (the last one in the article) was just simply wholesale and out of nowhere, said that he will come to the NAACP and speak regarding the issue of why black should demand paychecks and not welfare.

    Now, as I've stated, aside from the fact that it is not true that he just associated this with black folk out of the blue (and even if that is true he still didn't single out blacks as being some kind of disproportionate users of food stamp), what is interesting is this:

    Gingrich's original speech was May 13th, 2011.

    Dick Gregory's interview was May 15th, 2011.

    According to the NAACP website,they didn't release a statement on ANY of Gingrich's comments until JAN. 6th 2012!

    This is why it is titled, "NAACP Statement on Newt Gingrich Comments"...look under that and you will see a similar rebuff to Rick Santorum's comments, but what does it say? It says "RECENT" comments.

    OK, So the NAACP knew of GINGRICH'S COMMENTS FOR ALMOST A YEAR and DID NOT SAY A WORD publicly. Can anyone figure out why???

    Nothing but politics...truth is not essential to the process. even Gingrich would have had better sense than to simply bring it up out of the blue. The news and NAACP were fanning the flames and he responded to what they questioned.

    A whole LIE made up out of a partial truth. Sad day for us!


I've switched to real time comments for most posts. Refresh your screen if you post and do not see it right away. Please send me an email if you try to post a comment and cannot do so. Thanks.