Heck of a job, Baracky!

Better to be homeless with mom and/or dad than to live in a foster home, I guess.

I see Eddie "thinks" Obama accomplished these numbers in less than two months in office.

Uh-huh.

With the GOP always fighting to the death to keep any government help from going to these kids, it's a wonder there's not more of them.

Corky has it right.

Eddie has it bad.

I see Eddie "thinks" Obama accomplished these numbers in less than two months in office.

Uh-huh.

#3 | Posted by Corky

I'm sure Eddie can provide a link showing that the majority of these increases came about in the last 7 weeks.

Right Ed?

I see Eddie "thinks" Obama accomplished these numbers in less than two months in office.
#3 | Posted by Corky

If he actually was that powerful, imagine the good he'd be capable of.

Of course, he'd also be capable of great evil, but since its fantasy, I'll try to spin towards good.

Still, measuring homelessness is tricky, partly because of varying definitions of what constitutes homelessness.

Heck of a job, Baracky!

#1 | Posted by Eddie at 2009-03-10 11:48 AM

well shit

his own brother lives in a hut and his aunt is probabaly here illegally

he doesnt even take care of his own family...

Republicans don't care about the homeless. They actually hate the poor. Their base is the haves and have mores. Just ask Bush about it.

and this is good though...we as republicans maybe can do something to make it more like 10 in 50...
you know since we are coldhearted bastards...

hey its almost time for SS checks to be in old ladies mailboxes isnt it??

class warfare is alive and well

Wall Street's gift that keeps on giving, regardless which portion of the duopoly is in charge.

Nothing wrong with homelessness! Your dad can abandon you. Your mom can give you away. You can then seek sympathy through a victim mentality, go to school. And if you do the above well enough, you can become president of the USA.

Three cheers for more homelessness!

Don't worry this is nothing. When Obama gets through there will be a lot more than 1 in 50 homeless.

Obama is like a deer caught in the headlights. A teleprompter is not a replacement for sound judgement or a good intellect. Neither of which does Obama have.

So that explains the little bastards hanging around my house drinking all my orange soda and eatin all the cheetos...

If we truly are a christian nation we will be judged by how we treat the least amongst us.

We have fallen victim to mammon and we were warned about the peril of those actions.

Other than that, good job GOP. You have now starved the baby all that is left is to drown him...

"Heck of a job, Baracky!"
#1 | Posted by Eddie at 2009-03-10 11:48 AM

Said the Crew who Claimed 9-11 was on someone else's watch --- eight months after Bush took office!

"Better to be homeless with mom and/or dad than to live in a foster home, I guess."

Why? What if "mom and dad" are homeless because they are drug addicts? What if "mom and dad" are child abusers? The deference toward "keeping kids with the family" when the family is a bunch of deadbeats is exactly why our foster care system doesn't work.

Nothing wrong with homelessness! Your dad can abandon you. Your mom can give you away. You can then seek sympathy through a victim mentality, go to school. And if you do the above well enough, you can become president of the USA.

Three cheers for more homelessness!

#13 | Posted by TheOneBS at 2009-03-10 12:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

Do 'well enough'?

Like going to Harvard and becoming president of Harvard Review?

What part of sympathy helped his achieve that? Oh yeah, it didn't. The man did it on his own. Petty jealousy isn't very becoming.

Nothing wrong with homelessness! Your dad can abandon you. Your mom can give you away. You can then seek sympathy through a victim mentality, go to school. And if you do the above well enough, you can become president of the USA.

Three cheers for more homelessness!

#13 | Posted by Theo Nebs

Gotta love a guy who either ignores, or is ignorant of, the meaning of the term homeless in order to make an exceptionally lame "point".

Wasn't it the hero of the right, Ronnie Raygun, who claimed America has no homeless people?

here's the quote:

"You know, if I listened to him long enough, I would be convinced that we're in an economic downturn, and that people are homeless, and people are going without food and medical attention, and that we've got to do something about the unemployed." -- President Reagan, 6/8/88,

we as republicans ...you know since we are coldhearted bastards...

#11 | Posted by afkabl2

Considering some of your commentary as of late, and if one is see you as typically representative of Repubs, well...

I am not too sure that statistic is correct. I suppose it does depend on the definition. That many homeless and on the street - probably not. Still, its an issue.

I just don't find anything funny about homeless kids. But hey, that's just me.

who cares about those homeless kids. now that we have democracy in Iraq and the oil is flowing our way at a cost of trillions. So what if there's no interest or $ for feeding these unaborted mouths......

keep it up neocons, you still have more dirt to excavate for your graves......

How much of the wasted, useless programs like SCHIP would help these kids?

I suppose it does depend on the definition. That many homeless and on the street - probably not. Still, its an issue.
#23 | Posted by deadarmadillo

Generally homelessness is defined as not having a home for all or a portion of the year in which the study took place. This includes people that lose their homes to foreclosure, fire, hurricanes (like Katrina and Rita in '05, the year of the study), and other natural disasters. While you are correct, this IS an issue that needs to be dealt with, it is a problem the country has had for years and years. Those pretending it's a Republican problem are just sticking their heads in the sand.

I would be interested in seeing a follow up study of how many kids remain homeless for multiple years. These are the people we need to focus on, not those who are homeless for a week while their parents find a place to stay after a fire or hurricane.

Why doesn't Barry fix this problem?

Why doesn't Barry fix this problem?

#28 | Posted by fwthom

You and your sister Eddie have just got to get on the same page here. Why would Obama fix it? He caused it.

How many of them are runners? There are many runnaways that are included in thoes numbers.

I agree, solutions need to be based on real numbers. People living in a motel for a week because of a hurricane should not count.

Having a fully employed population earning a living wage would be a big help. Seems I recall the homeless situation was less of a problem back when Clinton was getting blow jobs. Of course its obvious now that trickle down economics work wonders for the homeless. They have all those rich financial wizards living in Manhattan townhouses and gated Palm Springs communities to look up to now......

"With the GOP always fighting to the death to keep any government help from going to these kids, it's a wonder there's not more of them"

What a stupid, pointless comment. The destruction of the American family & the institution of the cradle to grave welfare state mentality among the poor has done far more to create homelessness than the republicans. More well intentioned, empty headed social engineering of the left with no thought as to the long term consequences of their interventions.

As one who was orphaned at an early age I can tell you first hand that they foster care, "we'll pay you to give a shit" system is a TRAINWRECK! Oftentimes when families go to the "social services" designed to intervene before families are in crisis, the interest is not in helping the family but in seperating it, getting the kids into the system, & keeping or increasing funding.

Most of the kids that are homeless are in families with parents who don't give a shit. When they are taken from those families they are given to foster families who don't give a shit & it's all about keeping them in the system. More kids, more need, more money! If you have parents who are struggling, they are questioned & treated like criminals in the hopes that they can find a way to put their kids in the system when the best thing for all would be to help the family.

I do plenty in the local community to help with food kitchens, & distributions at churches, what I can when I can. Private entities do a much better job of combatting homelessness because their income is not derived from managing them & it doesn't interfere with their job security.

I didn't read statistics on the net, or pick up info on some website, I've LIVED it both as the child & the parent. The tearing down of the family unit from "we know better" liberalism is a major contributor.

Don't make this a dem or rep thing. WE ALL CAN & SHOULD DO BETTER!

The destruction of the American family & the institution of the cradle to grave welfare state mentality among the poor has done far more to create homelessness than the republicans...#32 | Posted by HATEBIGGOV

......then why do European countries with more welfare have less homelessness ?.......

......all my travels through Europe...I never saw the kind of bag ladies, homeless indigents and ghettos like we have here......I also lived in Europe for 8 years......and those countries have their ups and downs, but countries with more welfare do not produce more homeless people......in fact...they have far, far fewer.......

.....Europe, Japan, Canada also are suffering from the Big Recession.......

......but they still do not have our foreclosure and homelessness problem.......

......why ?.......

Re #32 - so, those 6 years of Bush, Republican congress, and conservative Supreme Court did....what, exactly?

1.5 million children were homeless between 2005 and 2006

Friggin' Obama and his magic time machine.

Uneddicated.

Skizz-the banking systems are much more regulated in Canada and Japan.

.......so then it seems that Hatebiggov is blaming the victims ........

......sort of like the Brazilian bishop that excommunicated the 9 year old rape victim........

I just don't find anything funny about homeless kids. But hey, that's just me.

#24 | Posted by danni

I just don't find anything funny about you. But hey, that's just me.

.....Europe, Japan, Canada also are suffering from the Big Recession.......

......but they still do not have our foreclosure and homelessness problem.......

......why ?.......

#34 | Posted by skizziks

Because they didn't have a government that thought EVERYONE should own a home.

With the GOP always fighting to the death to keep any government help from going to these kids, it's a wonder there's not more of them.

#4 | Posted by Corky

Since when are kids over 25 years old.

This kind of dishonesty worked before, but it's ALLLLLL coming out now.

Mid-terms coming up baby!

Perhaps their parents should stop paying for alcohol and drugs with their rent money

Because they didn't have a government that thought EVERYONE should own a home.

#40 | Posted by Sniper

Didn't you vote for that government Snippy, especially Glorious "Borrow and Piss-away" Leader? Fact is, other countries regulate their banks better.

The report is basically bullshit designed to illicit a response - Below is taken from thier web site. 1-50 are NOT HOMELESS. It is the POTENTIAL to be homeless. If you read the report is made up of state reports which is a conglomeration of random statistics _ then POOF - we have a homeless figure. The fact that it comes from a group that would not be in exsistence without homelessness - it is self serving.

But DID ANY OF YOU: Danni, Hans, Corky, North ever take time to actually read the report? No..it just fits your view that "America is a horrible country and everyone is mistreated except for the "rich" who did not do anything to get thier money ...they just got it from mom and dad...and the republicans caused it"

Instead of doing some basic research to see it just a crap report that they interpreted the facts to suit thier needs.

"To determine the risk of a child becoming homeless in each state, we designed an index that takes into account various
state indicators associated with family homelessness. When we consider risk factors for homelessness, we often
focus on individual vulnerabilities, such as a recent pregnancy or hospitalization of a parent for a mental health or
substance use problem. However, these individual factors only tell us who is more likely to be affected by adverse
economic and housing factors. Why someone becomes homeless is determined by structural factors such as the lack
of affordable housing and employment opportunities. As a result, we designed a risk index to focus on the structural
determinants of family homelessness. This index is comprised of state-level indicators in three domains: socio-economic
descriptors, housing market factors, and generosity of benefits.
To construct the index, nine factors within the three domains were ranked and then states were scored according to
their quintile (1 point for the top fifth of the states and up to 5 points for the worst fifth of the states). Domain scores were then
combined to create an overall score from 5 to 45 based on the total of the 15 rankings for the nine factors. The final step was to
rank the states by their overall score. The final ranking provides a picture of which states have structural characteristics that may
make them more or less vulnerable to high rates of child homelessness. A lower ranking indicates less vulnerability, while a higher
ranking indicates greater vulnerability."

"......then why do European countries with more welfare have less homelessness ?......."

I think that would be determined by the definition of "homeless" which has yet to be determined in a workable, honest number here so far.

".......so then it seems that Hatebiggov is blaming the victims ........"

You need to get your head out of you ass & learn to read. That isn't what I'm saying at all. What I am saying is that GOVERNMENT is not equipped to address the issue. My opinion backed up by my experiences. You don't have to agree but don't accuse me of not having compassion & placing blame where I am not.

BTW: Not all homeless are victims of anything more than their own poor choices. I know that doesn't fit into the lib mentality that everything is someone else's fault that doesn't fit into your opinions on the subject, but it's true. Children are unfortunately victims of poor parents, poor or poorly managed programs, and the vicimization of America to make a stupid, apathetic voting base with a sense of entitlement that encourages government dependence & kills their any faith in their own skills & abilities to change their own circumstances! Thanks!

#45 | Posted by HATEBIGGOV

......don't tell me.....you're a Christian, righ ?...

.....it's oddly ironic how it's easy to tell..

......don't tell me.....you're a Christian, righ ?...

.....it's oddly ironic how it's easy to tell..

I have faith in Jesus but don't define myself as anything because I don't "walk the walk" so to speak. I'm no hypocrite & I don't deal in absolutes. Organized religion isn't my thing personally but I don't live to tear it down either. I'm not threatened by it like many of you guys seem to be.

I was brought up in a rigid version of christianity & consider myself on parole for time served. I began studying ancient religions & cultures & learned how many of them had contributed to Christianity & how big the world was & it made me appreciate the message of Jesus more. That's just me. My family was flipping over Gilgamesh I can assure you. I'm the black, pagan sheep of this particular flock in their eyes.

Don't try to pigeonhole everyone into your little preconceived catagories. It never ceases to amaze me the lengths people like you will go to in your quest to prove a point about something that you claim bothers you oblivious to the fact that you are acting like or becoming just that.

Fo: Did you read the article? The number was based on previous actual counts. You are (mis)quoting on thier projection model.

The Report Card uses 2005-2006 McKinney-Vento school data since this was the most recent data available at the time this
report was developed. These data report only children who are enrolled in school and do not include children under the
age of six. Based on previous research that estimated 42% of homeless children are under the age of six,8 the Report Card
estimated the number of homeless children ages 0-5 by calculating 42% of the McKinney-Vento school data for each state.
In addition, the Report Card does not include the numbers of homeless, unaccompanied children and youth.
The individual state reports mention estimates of the number of unaccompanied homeless youth in each state, but these
numbers have not been added to the overall estimates described above. The number of unaccompanied youth of high school
age was calculated by using the McKinney-Vento enrollment data for grades K-8, and dividing the total by 8.5 (8.5 was used
because total kindergarten enrollments are typically one-half those of other primary grades).9 This provided an estimate of
the original cohort size for each grade because few children drop out of school while in grades K-8. We then multiplied the
primary school cohort estimate by the four grades, 9-12, to obtain a potential high school enrollment cohort. From this number,
we then subtracted the McKinney-Vento enrollment numbers for homeless high school students. The remaining number
represents an estimate of the number of unaccompanied, homeless youth, who are no longer enrolled in high school.

"Because they didn't have a government that thought EVERYONE should own a home."

Yeah, I think they missed out in Bush's "ownership society." I can still remember him bragging about how many more homeowners there were under his wonderful leadership.

Yeah, I think they missed out in Bush's "ownership society." I can still remember him bragging about how many more homeowners there were under his wonderful leadership.

So since Bush said it, homeownership is now a bad thing or is it still ok for EVERYONE to "deserve" to own a home? Just following along...

Danni-
It seems Bush's "ownership society" was a grand success. It required turning a blind eye to reckless lending practices, shady CDO scams, and being oblivious to the untenable housing bubble, but we're all the better for it...

So after all that it is Bush's Fault again. Well why didn't we save 50 posts and just say that then??

MRFAIR-
Bush was president for eight fucking years. Blame FDR for all I care about your opinion.

So after Obama is president for 8 years, is it safe to say that BetelG (500 handles later) will be here blaming him for the state of our nation?

Joe-when do righties start blaming Bush for ANYTHING? I think that'll be the measurement we should use.
After all, you guys spent 8 years telling us how smart you were and how dumb we were for not obeying God's Chosen President....

I don't know if I'll be posting here, but yes - I'll have the decency to hold his eight years accountable.

And you?

LOL

You know, McToast could house most of these kids without ever actually running into them.

Northgay, I never said Bush was a good president, and I hold him in contempt for reckless spending and useless wars. In my eyes, the lefties who defend Obama at every turn are just as bad as the Bush worshippers.

Joe-
There is a difference of eight years in which to gain an informed opinion.

Or, we could just throw irrational tantrums from the start and pretend the last eight years don't exist and that we had nothing to do with it anyways.

You're Welcome!

Best Wishes,
GWB

MRFAIR-
Bush was president for eight fucking years. Blame FDR for all I care about your opinion.

#53 | Posted by BetelG at 2009-03-10 03:38 PM | Reply | Flag

Betel - I get it, I get it. But now we're up to 60 POSTS! HAHA!

"There is a difference of eight years in which to gain an informed opinion"

Did you wait 8 years to criticize Bush?

Great work Obama. Maybe if you spent more time helping those kids instead of working on your backhand and jacuzzi skills at Camp David, they would be better off.

I don't think Bill Clinton discovered Camp David until his 2nd term. Obama is only a couple of months in and he is already a fixture vacationing there. Can't get work done in the 132 room White House mansion? What turd he is.

So another bogus report with skewed numbers for skewed results.

#63 | Posted by utastaff

Despite your political leanings, this is clearly not Obama's fault (TM). The study was from '05-'06. That being said, it probably wasn't Bush's fault (TM) either, as the 2000 study clearly showed 1.35 million homeless kids. Discounting the displacement rate from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, what are the odds that the rate is fairly similar from '00 to '06? Homelessness in America has been a problem for decades, and is not the fault of Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter, etc.

Great work Obama. Maybe if you spent more time helping those kids instead of working on your backhand and jacuzzi skills at Camp David, they would be better off.

I don't think Bill Clinton discovered Camp David until his 2nd term. Obama is only a couple of months in and he is already a fixture vacationing there. Can't get work done in the 132 room White House mansion? What turd he is.

#63 | Posted by utastaff

Another boob who thinks these homeless kids suddenly appeared in the last 7 weeks.

And do you really want to go there on the vacation thing?

Number of days W spent at Camp David, Kennebunkport, or Crawford the first 15 months of his Presidency = 250 (42% of his days in office)

Ultimately he eclipsed Reagan who held the previous record.

If you read this article, there doesn't seem to be any "there" there. Homelessness, by its very nature, is difficult to measure.

Some years ago, back when Zell Miller was still governor of Georgia (and still a democrat) Jane Fonda was speaking in Atlanta to some United Nations group dealing with world hunger, and made the comment that "some child goes to bed hungry in Georgia every night." Zell immediately challenged her to find even one... and she couldn't.. neither could any of the press corps that happily reported Jane's comment as fact.

Methinks the same issue could apply here.. I don't believe it. I volunteer for and support financially a homeless ministry here in Atlanta. Lots of adults show up.. but Kids are rare.. very very rare.. most homeless people, while sad, are either addicted to drugs or mentally unstable... That's not to imply that we don't help them.. but economics has nothing to do with it in most cases..

That statistic is BULLSHIT

Unless you count illegal aliens too......

That statistic is BULLSHIT

#68 | Posted by DavetheWave

That was a great rebuttal, Wave. Now wax up your board, because the surf's up, asshole!

Show me the statistics if you feel so arrogant null. As usual you are all talk, nothing of substance!!!!

That was a great rebuttal, Wave.

Yeah. It ranks right up there with this one. LOL

Loser...

Posted by nullifidian at 2009-03-10 04:54 PM

You know, funny thing, FDR was'nt on a high horse. He tried to help. Every last one of you assholes, repub or dem, need too get off your horse and solve it. Period, and Period.!!

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

The headline day after day after day on every newspaper in the US should read as follows until we solve this problem.

"THERE ARE HOMELESS CHILDREN IN AMERICA."

Heck of a job, Baracky!

Show me the statistics if you feel so arrogant null. As usual you are all talk, nothing of substance!!!!

#71 | Posted by DavetheWave

Dave, Null is young and thinks he's smart. Don't mess around with him. Now, if he were to study a site like Campaign for Freedom, then I might be impressed, but he doesn't have a high enough IQ for them.

This homeless story is bogus like all the global warming, oceans rising, polar bears dying bullshit stories. Don't believe anything you read on the internet. It is run by lefties and greenies with agendas.

"Heck of a job, Baracky!"

So you're blaming the guy who's been there for the last 8 weeks and giving a pass to the guy in charge for the 8 years before that?!?

Cough, cough...HACK.

"Don't believe anything you read on the internet."

Especially if FWThom posts it.

Dave, Null is young and thinks he's smart. Don't mess around with him. Now, if he were to study a site like Campaign for Freedom, then I might be impressed, but he doesn't have a high enough IQ for them.

#76 | Posted by Eddie

Says the guy who has been bitch-slapped here more often than Rihanna on the way to the Grammys.

FF for SanAn!

"Why wasn't this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year's wages." Judas Iscariot.... John 5:5

"He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.". . . .John 5:6

Moral of the story? Any SOB can feign compassion and care...even bloviate on the subject to make others think you're Mr. Wonderful. Scratch a little deeper, however, and we will find out the real you.

Keep selling yourselves all you compassion fascists. I can smell your stink through the computer screen!

Heck of a job, Baracky!

#75 | Posted by Eddie at 2009-03-10 10:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Broken record time here but...

Now I don't like Barack Obama at all.. but what the hell are you smoking? How is this Obama's fault?

#19 | Posted by COMMONSENSE at 2009-03-10 12:50 PM

Nothing wrong with homelessness! Your dad can abandon you. Your mom can give you away. You can then seek sympathy through a victim mentality, go to school. And if you do the above well enough, you can become president of the USA.

Three cheers for more homelessness!

#13 | Posted by TheOneBS at 2009-03-10 12:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

Do 'well enough'?

Like going to Harvard and becoming president of Harvard Review?

What part of sympathy helped his achieve that? Oh yeah, it didn't. The man did it on his own. Petty jealousy isn't very becoming.

"You don't realize that Obama's choice as President of the Harvard Law Review was analogous to a flaming homosexual male being elected Homecoming Queen at George Mason?"

What's with Republicans always equating everything with homosexuality?

Straight guys measure things in terms of football fields, Johnson in terms of gay males and homecoming queens. Telling.

You don't realize that Obama's choice as President of the Harvard Law Review was analogous to a flaming homosexual male being elected Homecoming Queen at George Mason?

That was very, very good writing Johnson.

Holy shit, I want that condensed on a bumper sticker.

You know its good when the pseudo-Freudians get angry enough to voice their objections.

"...compassion fascists..."

#82 | Posted by TheOneBS at 2009-03-10 11:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

Wow that's a new one! I thought I had seen pretty much every insult in the DR but here indeed is a freshie!

"Heck of a job, Baracky!"
So you're blaming the guy who's been there for the last 8 weeks and giving a pass to the guy in charge for the 8 years before that?!?
Cough, cough...HACK.

#78 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

You're right. Why isn't anyone praising Bush for the surge in stocks yesterday?

Utter bullshit. 1.5mil? You would see them everywhere. I never saw a homeless child in Houston. Saw dozens of homeless adults, never a child. They must all be homeless in other cities. And no, I did not read the article. BS like this is identifiable without wasting time on the lib crap trap contained within the text.

I never saw a homeless child in Houston.

#90 | Posted by ELCIDCE90

Sometimes we see what we want to see.

#90 ELCID and #91 SANAN: I know someone who works in a County Housing Agency or somesuch. She told me a similar story on a local scale and I was horrified. But when I pressed for more info I realized that the term "homeless" included all kinds of people that no average American would ever consider homeless. This category includes people who are between permanent mailing addresses or living with relatives or on the Agency's list for Govt-subsidized housing. Plus many others including, yes, people who live in their cars or under bridges. But most of the latter she admits are single men with some combination of substance-abuse and mental/emotional problems.

HERE'S the sticky point. She got a little defensive when I suggested maybe someone was using this scary talk to help their Agency. It was a while back and I think she's OK.

Just a little anecdote and maybe an antidote.

Just a little anecdote and maybe an antidote.

Posted by MrFair

I'm sure some areas are worse than others.

My church is considered an inner-city church. In the winter we participate in what is called the Homeless Stand Down where homeless people can come in for the weekend, get hot meals, haircuts, shower, and get laundry done. This year, just in our church facility we hosted about 450 people. Over 100 of them were under the age of 18.

That's my anecdote on the subject.

I never saw a homeless child in Houston.

#90 | Posted by ELCIDCE90

Sometimes we see what we want to see.

#91 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

And sometimes Liberals just make things up to pass HUGE spending bills...

I can see why being labelled a Socialist is not a good thing.

#93 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

You are a member of a church? Right! You are such a liar

You are a member of a church? Right! You are such a liar

#95 | Posted by Eddie

And you're a stupid POS.

By the way... did you bother to do any research on the article, or see where the data originates?

Didn't think so.

The data is reported by the states themselves. So Texas has the most homeless children. Is it your contention that Texas, being the liberal, socialist bastion that it is, made up their statistic?

You are a member of a church? Right! You are such a liar

#95 | Posted by Eddie

And you're a stupid POS.

By the way... did you bother to do any research on the article, or see where the data originates?

Didn't think so.

The data is reported by the states themselves. So Texas has the most homeless children. Is it your contention that Texas, being the liberal, socialist bastion that it is, made up their statistic?

#96 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

Wow! touchy.

So, it's ok for you to do it, but no one else. Typical!

this stat is cooked.

this stat is cooked.

#98 | Posted by somoco

No Way! It can't be cooked. It would be detrimental to the Lib's case.

No Way! It can't be cooked. It would be detrimental to the Lib's case.

#99 | Posted by Eddie

You never answered my question, Haskell. These statistics are reported by the states themselves.

Since Texas has the most homeless kids, is it your contention that Texas, being the liberal, socialist bastion that it is, made up their statistic?

The report defined as homeless any child age 18 or younger living with at least one parent or caregiver in such places as emergency shelters, motels, cars, or campgrounds due to economic hardships or losing their own homes. It did not include runaways or abandoned children.

So I need to retract my statement about "seeing" them - obviously if I did not visit a shelter I would not have seen a "homeless" child. But just as obvious is the misleading term "homeless" - technically correct yet connotes an "on the street" condition rather than a "without home or apartment" condition.

Since Texas has the most homeless kids, is it your contention that Texas, being the liberal, socialist bastion that it is, made up their statistic?

#100 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

Yeah, like Austin is a bastion of conservatism. Or the agencies which control the reporting - lots of conservatives working in the Texas Health and Human Services Commission or the Texas Department of State Health Services. Especially when numbers need to be high for government aid determination - your a tool sanan.

Yeah, like Austin is a bastion of conservatism. Or the agencies which control the reporting - lots of conservatives working in the Texas Health and Human Services Commission or the Texas Department of State Health Services. Especially when numbers need to be high for government aid determination - your a tool sanan.

#101 | Posted by elcidce90

Yeah, I'M the tool, while you're trying to justify your position by pretending that "liberals" control the reporting and information. LOL.

Maybe you ought to get your ass down to those shelters once in a while and lend a hand. You might get a whole new perspective.

LOL again. Like THAT'S every going to happen.

My church is considered an inner-city church. In the winter we participate in what is called the Homeless Stand Down where homeless people can come in for the weekend, get hot meals, haircuts, shower, and get laundry done. This year, just in our church facility we hosted about 450 people. Over 100 of them were under the age of 18.

That's my anecdote on the subject.

#93 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2009-03-11 10:59 AM | Reply | Flag

Sanan - I've volunteered at this sort of event. The most recent I did was in Spring 2008 and we saw about 80 men, 4 or 5 women and one entire family.

Sanan - I've volunteered at this sort of event. The most recent I did was in Spring 2008 and we saw about 80 men, 4 or 5 women and one entire family.

Posted by MrFair

Cleveland is in pretty bad shape right now... and the winter was cold. Different churches and organizations take turns hosting the Stand Down during the worst months.

Maybe you ought to get your ass down to those shelters once in a while and lend a hand. You might get a whole new perspective.

LOL again. Like THAT'S every going to happen.

#102 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue
Maybe I should, but certainly not because of your goading. So as you are a frequent visitor to the shelters, you can verify the 1 in 50 number can you? I mean, that was how you are "justifying" your position. 1 in 50 is bullshit and you know it. 2% of all the children in the U.S are homeless? Get real sanan. Tool, yep said it again. I may not hand out soup with a ladle, but the 60% of my tax dollars going to entitlements probably exceeds your salary - speculation on my part, but a good bet nonetheless.

No Way! It can't be cooked. It would be detrimental to the Lib's case.

#99 | Posted by Eddie

You never answered my question, Haskell. These statistics are reported by the states themselves.

Since Texas has the most homeless kids, is it your contention that Texas, being the liberal, socialist bastion that it is, made up their statistic?

#100 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

I am behaving as you do all the time! I never read the article. I just like fucking with you.

But, you always draw first blood.

Here's a hint. Leave me alone and I won't pick on you.

"I may not hand out soup with a ladle, but the 60% of my tax dollars going to entitlements probably exceeds your salary - speculation on my part, but a good bet nonetheless."

I generally find that those who feel the need to brag about their wealth or position generally fall woefully short when push comes to shove.

"So as you are a frequent visitor to the shelters, you can verify the 1 in 50 number can you? I mean, that was how you are "justifying" your position."

Uhm, no. I merely related a personal story about what I experienced this winter with a large number of homeless people, many of whom were kids.

If that doesn't jibe with the fantasy world you've created to make looking the other way more palatable . . . sorry.

Here's a hint. Leave me alone and I won't pick on you.

#106 | Posted by Eddie

Oh Eddie, you have to be able to actually make a point and then support it to pick on anyone. The entire DR awaits your doing so.

Uhm, no. I merely related a personal story about what I experienced this winter with a large number of homeless people, many of whom were kids.

If that doesn't jibe with the fantasy world you've created to make looking the other way more palatable . . . sorry.

#107 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue
And used it as the basis for justifying the articles numbers - "This year, just in our church facility we hosted about 450 people. Over 100 of them were under the age of 18."

Tool - you used numbers to obviusly correlate to the story. You easily could have left them out if you really were just relating an annecdote. - and I really don't care what the hell your experience has been on the DR about people relating personal monetary disclosures - I make what I make no matter what you believe - lucky for me. You make, well probably whatever the government gives you. I do commend you for your volunteer work - honestly. The good deed is lost on me however by your ridiculus belief that any numbers coming from a government agency which receives funding based on numbers of homeless people are accurate.

ridiculus=ridiculous

"Tool - you used numbers to obviusly correlate to the story. You easily could have left them out if you really were just relating an annecdote."

Maybe you should go back and read again and you'd see that I prefaced my story with "I'm sure some areas are worse than others". I thought the actual numbers involved in the story were important. Its a first-hand account of what is happening in Cleveland. Does that make you uncomfortable?

"I make what I make no matter what you believe - lucky for me. You make, well probably whatever the government gives you."

Whatever helps you get through the day. I imagine you'd be rather surprised, but on the other hand, what the hell difference does it make?

The main thing is regardless of whether its 1-10, 1-10, or 99-100, its a problem that has very real faces and lives that go with along with it.

And its pretty fucked up that someone's first reaction is that liberals must have infiltrated everywhere in order to cook the books, instead of concern that this might be a serious problem in this country. It is, and its getting worse.

Second 1-10 should have been 1-50.

San An,

Even one child without a home is an issue. But the self serving dishonesty - under the disguise of "helping the children" is what I and others have an issue with.

I will repost below my post at the top where I went in and read the way they came up with the number. It is not even CLOSE to the truth.

But it fits the press and liberal template of "Bad US - everything is terrible - kids are starving" template that is not true.

The fact are that the biggest problem with poor kids in America is OBESITY. You don't get that way from starving. 2)There are about 8000 federal programs designed to help the poor and "homeless" from support money for rents, to food stamps, to CHIPS, to public free clinics, to shelters, to Earned Income credit if they just TRY and get a job.

We pour BILLIONS into programs to "help the needy" and the result is that they do not become independent because it is easier just to live on the public. It has been estimated that you have to earn 30K per year before it pays you to work versus live off of Government programs.

That is the real shame.

Original post was #43 which is a DIRECT PASTE from the report itself (not from the article which actually does not represent the real report) I went to the website of the group that wrote the report and read it.

I'll post the short version:

Here's how the homeless shelters we pour "billions" (lol, billions) into work.

You get up at 7 AM. The registration for the next location begins at 3 PM. However, if you are not in line by 11 AM, you're not going to get a bed. Then you have to be in by 7 PM, and if you leave during that time you cannot come back.

These shelters are one day places, and miles apart.

Now how, exactly, are homeless people SUPPOSED to get out of the programs when the programs are part of the problem themselves?

Did you see any time in there for a job?

We had a young lady working in the warehouse where I work, I think I mentiioned her here before. She had three kids, lived in a shelter and struggled awfully hard. Eventually, she got moved up to more private housing and was able to get into some kind of school. We all grew to respect this girl a great deal watching her struggle. She readily admitted that she had caused her own plight...drugs...bad guys...etc. but I still think of her and she has been gone from there about a year now. Probably the funniest girl I ever met. Probably also the most determined. I hope she continued on her quest for a better life, she really did deserve it.

Stat was cooked. Fucking libs.