Habitat for Humanity: Welfare for guilty, rich, white, liberals
Having voted for every conceivable social program, liberals -- and especially liberal Christians -- are facing a dilemma:
How do you show you love poor people when all you can do is vote for more spending?
A horrible problem.
Fortunately, some years ago a guilty white liberal came up with a solution. Habitat for Humanity! Soon after, the poster boy for guilty white liberals, Jimmy Carter joined in. Now guilty white liberal Christians can get out and swing a hammer for poverty. I'll hammer in the morning... I'll hammer in the evening... sing along.
Recently in my local paper, The Chronicle-Tribune of Marion, IN, I read about another of the lucky Habitat recipients.
As many know, Habitat for Humanity requires recipients of homes to work on the homes. In the fascinating article of March 17, we read that one of the recipients is on disability, being too disabled by Lupus to work, but nonetheless not disabled enough to prevent her from working on her Habitat house. Or perhaps, in this case, Habitat made an exception? Or, perhaps, she became disabled by Lupus shortly after she got her new house.
She's taking an Indiana Wesleyan class! (Who paid for THAT do you think?) She has three out of wedlock children! (Who do you think fed them for the last 20 years?)
I'm glad you like your house lady, but I'M SICK OF SUPPORTING YOUR USELESS ASS.
I'M SICK OF LIBERAL NEWSPAPERS. I want some information:
I want to know how many Habitat recipients are on disability, ADC, or otherwise accepting HUD payments.
I want to know what the default rate is.
I want to know what the state of the housing stock in Grant County is.
Habitat was started because there was allegedly a lack of low cost housing. Now that the government is using private housing sources to place HUD recipients, this isn't an issue (if, indeed, it ever was.)
Today, Habitat exists for one reason and one reason only: To give do gooders something to do.
How do you show you love poor people when all you can do is vote for more spending?
A horrible problem.
Fortunately, some years ago a guilty white liberal came up with a solution. Habitat for Humanity! Soon after, the poster boy for guilty white liberals, Jimmy Carter joined in. Now guilty white liberal Christians can get out and swing a hammer for poverty. I'll hammer in the morning... I'll hammer in the evening... sing along.
Recently in my local paper, The Chronicle-Tribune of Marion, IN, I read about another of the lucky Habitat recipients.
As many know, Habitat for Humanity requires recipients of homes to work on the homes. In the fascinating article of March 17, we read that one of the recipients is on disability, being too disabled by Lupus to work, but nonetheless not disabled enough to prevent her from working on her Habitat house. Or perhaps, in this case, Habitat made an exception? Or, perhaps, she became disabled by Lupus shortly after she got her new house.
She's taking an Indiana Wesleyan class! (Who paid for THAT do you think?) She has three out of wedlock children! (Who do you think fed them for the last 20 years?)
I'm glad you like your house lady, but I'M SICK OF SUPPORTING YOUR USELESS ASS.
I'M SICK OF LIBERAL NEWSPAPERS. I want some information:
I want to know how many Habitat recipients are on disability, ADC, or otherwise accepting HUD payments.
I want to know what the default rate is.
I want to know what the state of the housing stock in Grant County is.
Habitat was started because there was allegedly a lack of low cost housing. Now that the government is using private housing sources to place HUD recipients, this isn't an issue (if, indeed, it ever was.)
Today, Habitat exists for one reason and one reason only: To give do gooders something to do.
posted by Walker at 1:24 PM
2 Comments:
You have put your finger on it for sure! Excellent!
I see where the above posts tie in with this one.
You've noted something unfortunately common, as much as you wouldn't want it to be: the folks getting Habitat for Humanity houses are going to be on the dole in most if not all parts of their lives. While it would be nice if it was a boost up, for most of the folks getting them it's one more part of their free ride, while the folks building these houses get to pat themselves on the back and feel good about themselves.
Unfortunately, Zig Ziglar had it right: you give a man a dole, you rob him of his dignity. These folks may mean well (where does that good-intention-paved road lead again?), but, more often than not, the way they do it, and who they do it for--they end up taking something much more precious and valuable from these folks than any thing they could ever give them.
Post a Comment
<< Home