We usually reserve this for the likes of Dori Monson, but since Herr Dori has been on his best behavior promoting driver's ed videos on his show, we thought we'd scan around the dial and see what the other dullards were opining about.
It seems the poor and underfed according to Sean Hannity are doing just fine, thank you if they would only cut out "the soda and drink more water". Never mind the fact that soda consumption among teens has been falling. "Good wholesome" food is readily available too if the poor would just look at the myriad of choices.
A report from the U.S. Department of Agriculture on food insecurity in America released in September 2011 found that "in 2010, 17.2 million households in America had difficulty providing enough food due to a lack of resources."
Food insecurity rates were substantially higher than the national average for households with incomes near or below the current federal poverty line ($22,350 for a family of four), households with children headed by single women or single men, and black and Hispanic households.
Herr Hannity blames the fact that most of the poor he has dined with have too many of the things he has too like 2 color tv's (do they make any other TV besides a color tv?) and "other things" which obviously has led to their nutritional decline.
Rightwingers also like to point out that poor people have such luxury items as refrigerators and stoves - and then pretend to be all outraged. It's really quite cute.
Posted by: Mike D | April 26, 2012 at 07:47 PM
Not much interest in what Hannity has to say.
He's actually dined with poor people? I'd ask him to prove that.
Posted by: Truth-seeker | April 26, 2012 at 08:08 PM
If Hannity ate lunch in the commissary at the same time as a janitor, that would qualify.
Posted by: Hank Hill | April 26, 2012 at 08:16 PM
Poverty has grown by leaps and bounds since LBJ's "Great Society". The poverty pimps in the Democrat party have made an industry of keeping the poor in "their place". Give them just enough to be dependent but not allow them to advance.
There is no longer any reason for the black man to hang around and take care of his offspring or the "baby mama". The Crips, Bloods, BGD's etc. have taken over raising the kids. That's working out well.
It is starting to look the same for the white trash.
Schools can't educate the little pukes anymore, let alone instill a little fear of consequences via punishment. Just push them through.
Thank God for Asian kids and their intact families. We will still have Dr's, engineers and mathematicians for a couple more generations (lest, of course the democrats don't buy them off with free food, medical, housing and no income taxes).
Hannity is no rocket scientist (but who needs rocket scientist? We sold NASA out for free stuff for democrats) but below all of his bs is some truth.
Posted by: Chucks | April 26, 2012 at 09:52 PM
Huh? Are you crazy or is this just hyperbole? Do you have any real world numbers? Is this rattle trap from a teabagger?
Posted by: Finis Hominis | April 26, 2012 at 10:26 PM
the above is in response to the comment by chucks…
“Poverty has grown by leaps and bounds”
Posted by: Chucks | April 26, 2012 at 09:52 PM
Posted by: Finis Hominis | April 26, 2012 at 10:30 PM
The information is just a google or wikipedia search away FH. This past September, the Census bureau reported over 46,000,000 Americans in poverty. That is the highest in 5 decades. Yep, the war of poverty is working well.
Eighty to ninety% of black children in this country are born to single mothers. etc.......
Hannity is much more right than wrong.
Posted by: Chucks | April 26, 2012 at 11:05 PM
We know why Republicans do the bidding of the uber-wealthy (so they will be rewarded with wealth in return)...but why do Democrats work so hard to keep the poor in poverty in your view Chucks? What's the payoff? I know you're probably going to say "votes", but still - assuming it's true - how is getting voted back into office time after time an incentive? How does giving poor people relief make Democrats rich?
Posted by: Mike D | April 27, 2012 at 12:19 AM
The war on poverty was ended by Reagan. It's been downhill ever since.
This poster lives off a government paycheck and government-provided healthcare.
And for the majority of that the last thirty years, his side has been in charge.
Why does anybody even try reasoning with these people?
Posted by: Truth-seeker | April 27, 2012 at 07:42 AM
And whatever Wiki says the census bureau says is a result of Republican policies.
Posted by: Truth-seeker | April 27, 2012 at 07:44 AM
The majority of welfare recipients are white, chuckles. The White lie the right is afraid to admit
Among the poorest of the poor–single mothers, living below the poverty line with minor children to support 39.7 percent of AFDC clients are Black single mothers and 38.1 percent are White women with children.
Food stamp recipients are 37.2 percent Black and 46.2 percent White.
Medicaid benefits are paid to 27.5 percent Black recipients compared to 48.5 percent White clients.
Posted by: Coiler | April 27, 2012 at 08:10 AM
I would nominate Don O'Neil for honorable mention. As of Wednesday 25 April 2012, he was unaware that John McCain is a former POW. As he was clumsily lurching towards a punchline about McCain doinking Filipino hookers circa 1967, his slurring enabler pointed out that McCain was, literally, otherwise detained ("one of those POW guys").
Posted by: Darksecretplace | April 27, 2012 at 10:02 AM
Maybe Don thought the 'Hanoi Hilton' was in fact a Hilton...
In regards to S Hannity he's a bore and a tiresome one at that. And that deal with him tossing the football reminds me of the Olby crumpling up the paper to toss at the camera.
Does anyone actually listen to Hannity for content? Jeez, how hard is it to guess what his opinion will be. And that 'love the troops' is interesting as when he had a chance to join he found other things to do.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | April 27, 2012 at 11:23 AM
Yes, Don O'Neil is a bore - loves to hear himself blab away. Hannity is boring because he is so predictable and misses the boat on occasion and repeats it too. He has made a few salient points - he was ahead of the curve on foreshadowing what an Obama presidency would look like - lipstick on pig is an understatement after it was all Bush's fault.
However, he is about as boring as Prez BO's SOTU speeches over the last 3 years, which have essentially been carbon copies starting in 2010. All this while Sean gives his repetitive talking points much like they were back in 2009. The only positive thing is that his talking points are more believable than most anything that comes out the President's mouth - that's not saying much though.
Posted by: KS | April 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM
If I happen to disagree with Hanity then it's because he certainly, absolutely, positively, must be an idiot.
Posted by: Harrison Henderson III | April 27, 2012 at 12:01 PM
If you believe that, maybe you should challenge to a debate mano a mano to set the record straight - heheh
Posted by: KS | April 27, 2012 at 12:12 PM
Statistics 101 should have taught that there is little to no relevancy to show % comparisons to a total all-inclusive universe and that to fairly compare, one must calculate the % to its own universe.; realizing that the two subject universes are indeed significantly different. Only then can one make a somewhat meaningful comparison.
Posted by: DontWorryBeHappy | April 27, 2012 at 03:06 PM
And extrapolated to the current discussion, your point is . . . ?
Posted by: john boner | April 27, 2012 at 03:28 PM
It just might answer the header question of who could be the most out of touch person in America.
Posted by: DontWorryBeHappy | April 27, 2012 at 04:33 PM