Is Rush Right? Part II

by Kathleen McKinley | December 16, 2010 11:43 am

Remember when I wrote a post called, “Is Rush Right?” [1]You probably do, because Rush read the thing in it’s entirety on air and I went crazy making sure you knew about it. Rush has stated over and over that he feels Obama is purposedly bringing this country down. I find it hard to wrap my mind around that.

Anyway, one other central question in the post is why liberals continue to believe in social policy when it’s clear that it’s failed? Kathryn Lopez at NRO interviews Michael Knox Beran[2], the author of a number of books, including “The Last Patrician,” on Robert Kennedy, and “Jefferson’s Demons.” Beran is the author of the new book “Pathology of the Elites,” which he discusses with Kathryn. This part of his interview struck me as answering my question on why liberals continue policies that hurt society:

The elites who would save the world with social legislation are conscious only of a magnificent generosity of intention: In believing their motives to be pure, they have erected utopias in their hearts, Potemkin villages in their minds — specious constructions that allow them to feel good about themselves and to disavow the harmful consequences of their policies.

Even as Welfare Reform was proven to be such a stunning success, the liberals still can’t accept it. They still push for the policies that leave the poor mired in a generational dependency on the government

Before welfare reform the AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children), the federal government gave the states more money for every family they added to their welfare rolls. Naturally, this system gave states a disincentive to help people transition from unemployment and dependence on government to work and independence.

The reforms required work after two years of benefits, with a lifetime limit of five years on benefits. This encouraged two-parent families and encouraged marriage for those of childbearing years, and enhanced enforcement of child support. Welfare rolls diminished by 70%.

But Pres. Obama couldn’t let that success go unchallenged.

According to a September study from the Heritage Foundation:

“In his first two years in office, President Barack Obama will increase annual federal [welfare] spending by one-third from $522 billion to $697 billion. The combined two-year increase will equal almost $263 billion. After adjusting for inflation, this increase is 2 1/2 times greater than any previous increase in federal welfare spending in U.S. history.”

Mr. Obama’s welfare increases are not temporary. In fact, over the next decade, Mr. Obama will spend $10.3 trillion on welfare. That equals, according to the study, “approximately $250,000 for each person currently living in poverty in the U.S., or $1 million for a poor family of four.”

Meanwhile, the president’s newly proposed 2011 budget adds a new “emergency fund” to TANF at a cost of $2.5 billion.

So, to be clear. Reform worked beautifully, it saves us billions at a time when we really need to save billions, but instead Obama SPENDS billions to turn those successes around.

I’m still asking, Is Rush Right?