Protestors demand Rep. Lewis __ no cuts to free government Medicaid cheese


See Protesters gather for rally outside home of Rep. Jason Lewis

August 10th, 2017

***”Protesters who have been trying to get 2nd Congressional District Rep. Jason Lewis’s attention got it last night.

A group rallied outside his Woodbury home and a video of their demonstration was later posted to YouTube. In the video, protesters left a large letter for Lewis demanding he oppose cuts to Medicaid.

“Healthcare is a human right,” the group chanted in his neighborhood, as shown in the YouTube video.”***

Well, there you have it folks. These protestors believe it is their “human right” to have government force used to confiscate the earned wages of their neighbor, and then use that money to finance these protestor’s personal economic needs.

And what did one of our forefathers say with regard to this very idea?

"Under a just and equal Government, every individual is entitled to protection in the enjoyment of the whole product of his labor, except such portion of it as is necessary to enable Government to protect the rest; this is given only in consideration of the protection offered. In every bounty, exclusive right, or monopoly, Government violates the stipulation on her part; for, by such a regulation, the product of one man’s labor is transferred to the use and enjoyment of another. The exercise of such a right on the part of Government can be justified on no other principle, than that the whole product of the labor or every individual is the real property of Government, and may be distributed among the several parts of the community by government discretion; such a supposition would directly involve the idea, that every individual in the community is merely a slave and bondsman to Government, who, although he may labor, is not to expect protection in the product of his labor. An authority given to any Government to exercise such a principle, would lead to a complete system of tyranny." __ See Representative Giles, speaking before Congress February 3rd, 1792

So, the fact of the matter is, these free government cheese protestors support the very foundation of tyranny, and have no objection to government force being used to engage in what amounts to robbery!


"To lay with one hand the power of the government on the property of the citizen and with the other to bestow upon favored individuals, to aid private enterprises and build up private fortunes is none the less a robbery because it is done under forms of law and called taxation." ____ Savings and Loan Association v. Topeka,(1875).


Keep in mind many of those protestors are illegal entrants who thrive on free government cheese!

See: Cashing in: Illegal immigrants get $1,261 more welfare than American families, $5,692 vs. $4,431
”Illegal immigrant households receive an average of $5,692 in federal welfare benefits every year, far more than the average “native” American household, at $4,431, according to a new report on the cost of immigration released Monday.”


American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance a maternity ward for the poverty stricken populations of other countries who invade America’s borders to give birth.


Which kind of knocks into a cocked-hat, AS’s claim that CATO determined that native-born Americans and legal immigrants receive more government “assistance” than illegals. Maybe they do–in total numbers–but that’s because there are (so far) more native-born Americans and legal immigrants than illegals, though that may change very soon.


Per person, under the poverty line:

Poor Immigrants Use Public Benefits at a Lower Rate than Poor Native-Born Citizens

> Low-income immigrants use public benefits like Medicaid or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly the Food Stamp Program) at a lower rate than low-income native-born citizens.1 Many immigrants are ineligible for public benefits because of their immigration status. Nonetheless, some claim that immigrants use more public benefits than the native born, creating a serious and unfair burden for citizens.2 This analysis provides updated analysis of immigrant and native-born utilization of Medicaid, SNAP, cash assistance (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and similar programs), and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program based on the most recent data from the Census Bureau’s March 2012 Current Population Survey (CPS).

Compare apples to apples Dave, and Americans are clearly taking more.

It’s not surprising; if you know English, you’re better able to access Government. If you know our culture, you can better sense where welfare can be found.


Nonsense. There are thousands of groups ready, willing and able to “help” illegals access welfare…some meeting the illegals AT the border!


They don’t compare to the numbers of groups willing to help poor Urban Americans; they’re a far more reliable voting bloc anyway.

Poor Americans also tend to have had relatives, parents and grandparents, who were welfare recipients too; a generational legacy that feeds on itself.

Just think it through Dave; poor Americans can access the system better than an illegal who doesn’t speak English, doesn’t know our legal system, nor understands our culture.

Being raised here confers certain advantages on that front.


NOW who’s comparing apples to oranges. Of course there are more poor Americans on welfare than there are illegal immigrants. So far, poor Americans vastly OUTNUMBER illegal immigrants. That doesn’t mean that illegals don’t have access to social welfare programs. In SoCalifornia, they comprise over 95% of the patients seen (ultimately for free) by hospital ERs–enough so that many hospitals are simply CLOSING their ERs or are more than quadrupling their ER rates to paying patients to make up the losses from treating illegals. In South Texas, social service pimps are meeting illegals as they cross the border and helping them apply for welfare and other government “assistance.” Hell, Obama even sent pamphlets in Spanish to Mexico explaining how to contact social services once here! If you think a 10-year-old Cato “study” is reflective of what’s been going on for the past 8 years, you’ve been living in a cave somewhere.


? Dave it was Per person, under the the poverty line, from the start. Apples to apples, poor people to poor people.

Per person, Poor Americans use more than illegal immigrants.

Not just in absolute terms, per person.

> Of course there are more poor Americans on welfare than there are illegal immigrants. So far, poor Americans vastly OUTNUMBER illegal immigrants.

Per person.

> That doesn’t mean that illegals don’t have access to social welfare programs.

It means they use less programs at once.

As CATO found out, illegals are less aware, or simply less willing, to go find other welfare programs to sign up for at the same time.

Americans however don’t have that hesitation or lack of awareness; they’re far more likely to match SNAP with Medicaid, TANF, and the Supplemental Security Income (SSI).

Per person, Poor Americans are more likely to be using more welfare programs simultaneously.

And again, this result is not surprising, because Poor Americans are more literate about our system, and don’t have to worry if these systems will point out to law enforcement where they are.

> If you think a 10-year-old Cato "study

2013 using 2012 data And yes, because they actually looked at this data. They looked at the figures the Government compiles for its own internal use.

They also took a crack at it again in 2015 when CIS tried to compare “apples to elephants”.


It’s STILL BS, though. CATO used to be useful. It stopped being so long ago, succumbing to the siren song of socialist dogma.


No Dave, you’re just wrong, and as to what is actual B.S…

> CATO used to be useful. It stopped being so long ago, succumbing to the siren song of socialist dogma.

B.S., they did the study on the cost of welfare that same exact year:

When Welfare Pays Better than Work

FOX NEWS: Cato Institute: Welfare Pays More Than Twice Minimum Wage In A Dozen States

CATO is comprised of economists who pay attention to what helps the economy. They are no friend to government intervention, nor welfare, and have come out with policy piece after policy piece demanding legislators reform or end it. If you have evidence that can prove them wrong, be my guest, put it forward, but if all you’re going to do is sit there and throw out “They disagree with me, so they must be socialist”, Well then** we have a problem Dave**. Economists agree with them, the Independent Institute, The Fraser institute, the Manhattan institute, the American Enterprise Institute, the Mercatus Institute, the Independent Institute, the Reason Foundation, the FEE, the Learn Liberty Initiative

They all agree with CATO.

So unless you’re suggesting a socialist will put hit pieces on Obamacare, will rail against the TARP and the GM Bailouts, and will even go so far as to say “leave the Masterpiece baker alone”… Oh, and infiltrated Every single damn free marketeer outfit in America, you’re just going to have to get over the fact that Free Marketeers do not agree with you because they **actually looked at welfare usage figures. **

Not because “socialism”, but because did the research.


Do you support an immigration policy which forbids immigrants from receiving any form of government cheese for at least five years?


There was a time not too long ago in New York when the able-bodied were ashamed to accept home relief, a program created by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1931 when he was Governor. Now, New York City and many other major cities are infested with countless government cheese factions, including recent immigrants, who not only demand welfare, but use it to buy beer, wine, drugs, sex, and Lotto tickets.


I parrot Right Wing: I’m for banning it forever, and I’d only support 5 years as an incremental step to banning it forever.

So answer my question: why do we restrict immigrants, when we’re already restricting welfare?


Immigrants ought to be restricted for a number of common sense reasons: criminal history; likelihood of being a public burden; being infected with a contagious disease such as chickenpox, tuberculosis, measles, mumps, etc.; a mental disorder; are some of the common sense reasons for rejecting immigrants.