Rand Paul Suggests Cutting Benefits For Unwed Mothers With Too Many Kids

[big_dog]

Source: The Raw Story Sunday, January 26, 2014 9:30 EST

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) suggested the possibility of cutting government benefits for unwed mothers who have multiple children.

“Maybe we have to say ‘enough’s enough, you shouldn’t be having kids after a certain amount,’” said Paul, who opposes legal abortion and has criticized the federal health care law’s contraception mandate as a violation of religious and economic liberty.

The likely 2016 presidential candidate made the remarks during a luncheon in Lexington, reported the Lexington Herald-Leader, in response to a question about workforce development.

The conservative senator said communities or families should be responsible for the prevention of unplanned or unwanted pregnancy, but he said government policies could discourage unwed mothers from having additional children. “Married with kids versus unmarried with kids is the difference between living in poverty and not,” Paul said.

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/26/enough-is-enough-rand-paul-suggests-cutting-benefits-for-unwed-mothers-with-too-many-kids/

[jsr]

1. How about cutting government benefits for corporations that outsource?

[Andy823]

28. Along with

Tax breaks and subsidies for big oil, any kind of corporate "welfare" to corporations and banks, and lets take away all the "perks" members of congress get and let them pay for all the "extras" themselves.

There are many, many ways to cut "wasted" money, so lets start with the rich and work are way "down", not start with the poor and never work our way up!

[unionthug777]

2. really??

what a ass !!!!

[jsr]

3. He wants the kids to starve

[SharonAnn]

25. He wants to punish the children for being born?

[olddad56]

58. Exactly, teach those kids a lesson for choosing the circumstance under which they were born....

That will help ensure that they will repeat the cycle and grown up to have children who will be born under the same circumstances.

This will solve the problem.

[christx30]

69. Those children deserve it,

after not being responsible enough to come out of the correct vagina.

[Feral Child]

79. No, he wants to punish women

for having sex without pledging servitude to a male.

[olddad56]

80. I think in a lot of cases, it isn't about not pledging servitude,

it is about pledging servitude to a male who is no longer in the picture.

[Feral Child]

86. Indeed.

Because to the Pauls, that contract is one-way. Men can abandon women with impunity, but a woman without a man needs to be restricted and chastised.

[Scairp]

88. I don't truly hate many people

But this guy is getting up there on my list of people to hate. He is a rich boy asshole who hasn't the first clue about how hard it is for all parents making little money to support their children, and it has fuck all to do with whether the mother is married. What about single fathers? Fathers get custody too and have problems supporting their kids. Or couples who are in a committed relationship but don't happen to be in a legal marriage. I guess he thinks that poorer women who are not married can't keep their slutty legs closed and must be singled out for condemnation. It is such blatant misogyny that I have to wonder how this piece of shit can ever hope to be a contender for the presidential nomination in '16.

[heaven05]

4. this guy is a mean POS

and amerikkkans voted him into office. This not a society of enlightened citizenry. Amerikkkan are responsible for this RW disaster and the teacrook/thug mentality being prominent in political discourse today! Amerikkkans!!!!

[perdita9]

5. Great argument for keeping abortion legal, Rand

I'm sure your pastor is in complete agreement with it.

[Grassy Knoll]

6. War on woman is thy name. n/t

[davidthegnome]

7. Wow

There have been times in the past, when Rand Paul has said something I did not completely disagree with. This, though, demonstrates the difference between shitbags like Rand Paul - and REAL Americans - Americans who work hard for a living, who raise children, who make this Country great. Many of those Americans are getting "government benefits" because times are hard. What the fuck does Paul know about it? The greatest discomfort he has to experience is probably from that silver spoon up his ass. He has no idea what life is like for real people, he has no idea what the hell he is talking about.

Fuck you, Mr. Paul. If you ever get anywhere near the Presidency, I will be on the first flight to all places elsewhere.

What we need to do is stop paying douche bags like Paul so much. Let's take their salaries and put them to use helping people who do the real work in this Country. Let's force assholes like Paul to survive on minimum wage, then tell them that they're takers when they have to apply for food stamps or welfare.

[lobodons]

8. How about cutting government subsidies to companies making record profits.

$50 billion to Big Oil comes to mind.

[jsr]

15. And getting tax refunds

[jwirr]

9. LOL The rw mothers I know who have more than 5 children are all rwers protesting the

abortion laws. And they were also on welfare. Their kids go to college almost free and they get food stamps. Go ahead paul - hurt your own.

[notadmblnd]

10. ya know Rand, the government wouldn't have to pay a single cent to an unwed mother

if the government made the daddies of these babies help pay for their inability to keep their penises in their pants.

[seattledo]

39. Don't blame just the men

Unless it was rape, it was both parties that are responsible for the decision. I do not want children so I know better than to do something that may result in one.

[notadmblnd]

45. I don't think you read what I posted

If you read it, you didn't comprehend it.

AFAIC, men are consenting to becoming a father every time they engage in unprotected sex. As are women if they choose to have unprotected sex. Both are agreeing to potentially becoming parents.

However, it's not usually the woman who walk out on their responsibilities once the results of their irresponsible behavior comes into this world. Hence Mr. Paul's rant on unwed mothers, not unwed fathers.

If the government enforced males to be responsible for the results of their irresponsible behavior by contributing to their off spring's basic human needs, no woman would ever, ever need to go to the government for assistance.

[demigoddess]

71. and the right wing wants to deny

the right to use all kinds of birth control. And if a woman has two kids or even one, shouldn't she be at home instead of at work for the 12 hours a day it takes to earn enough to pay for food and daycare!!!??? Rand Paul is a stupid idiot!!!!

[daybranch]

73. too much of an exaggeration

Men should be responsible for their children but many times the only way the kids and the wife can eat is for an unemployed husband to leave the household. Lets stop the exaggeration and the anger at men, Some men lleave for good reason, and some men just leave, You should understand the difference.

[notadmblnd]

85. Apparently you didn't understand what I wrote either.

Bet you didn't write Ron Paul and tell him to stop the exaggeration and anger at single mothers. Did ya?

[Ezlivin]

11. Mandatory sterilization if they're not in the top 1%

It seems like a sound public policy.

The only reason I get out of bed in the morning is to do my master's bidding. I am grateful for the crumbs from his table and if I need to be beat it's only because I deserve it.

Praise be to our glorious masters!

[diabeticman]

12. How many is too many kids

[big_dog]

18. even he's not sure

“There’s all kinds of ways, and we can debate … but there are all kinds of ways to stop having kids,” said Paul, although he didn’t specifically identify any of those ways.

An aide to Paul declined to comment later Thursday when asked to clarify the senator’s remarks.

[Moonwalk]

46. Yes, there are all kinds of ways—like contraception as part of insurance plans....

Which the GOP has been fighting tooth and nail. Also easy access to family planning and abortion services. Those are great ways to help keep unwed moms from having kids. So, why are you part and party to the side that's making such things harder to keep women from becoming unwed moms with lots of kids they have to feed and clothe and house?

I don't know if he's more an ass for saying such a thing--yeah, cut off the funds; and the kids already born will just vanish from existence... -- or if he's more an ass for saying such a thing given what republicans have been doing to family planning services over the last fifteen years.

[quakerboy]

30. It all depends on demographics, ya see

I am sure that Mr Pauls honest answer to that is that it will vary from family to family, and especially between... "Urban" vs suburban or rural folks.

[SummerSnow]

13. Wow ,isn't that too much govt. They cry about it all the time.

[tinrobot]

14. Rand Paul Suggests Cutting Benefits For Children

There... fixed that headline.

Oh... and why does Rand Paul hate children so much?

[SummerSnow]

16. I bet he came out with this after the octomom welfare fraud article

[QuestForSense]

17. He wears a mask of sanity, just like his daddy.

But underneath lies a vicious, snarling sociopath trolling to his base, and by base I mean the lowest of the low.

[SHRED]

19. The GOP really knows how to woo the women voters...LOL

[hunter]

20. Before those kids were conceived they made their choices and picked the wrong parents...

Poor choices have consequences. Those kids deserve to go hungry.

It's the American way.

[Thinkingabout]

21. If Rand Paul had said we need to redirect our funds to Family Planning to provide birth control

options to women instead of going the higher cost of caring for children in which is not affordable by the parents, then this would be sensible but not to cut the benefits to children in which the GOP wants in forced births. Which is cheaper, birth control pills or the cost of supporting a birth which should not have happened.

[PearliePoo2]

31. Racist ReThugs only want CERTAIN people having babies.

NO to any birth control, NO to family planning and NO to abortion.
The fucked-up party of NO.
Idiots.

[Thinkingabout]

43. But they are not saying it like that, also those saying lots of statements are past the age

to be concerned about birth control and into the age of Viagra, but they don't talk about the government furnishing Viagra. How sad, those who are making a lot of these statements are claiming to be "Christians", who are supposed to love everybody, help the sick and feed the hungry, they do not live this part of their Christianity.

[wandy]

44. Truth is if Rand Paul said something sensible like that it would hurt his.......

standing as the Teapublian great white champion of the week.
The problem is not that he is just playing to his base.
The problem is that it is exactly what his base WANT!

GOP co. appealing to the darker side of human nature.

[QuestForSense]

48. Exactly! Tell them what they want to hear.

[PADemD]

22. Does he include widowed mothers, too?

Does he want to deny social security benefits to the children of servicemen and women who have died for their country?

If they are survived by four children, is that too much for him?

[sulphurdunn]

23. And I thought the Scarlet Letter

was a work for fiction. Of course, I also thought that libertarians were just greedy, thumb sucking little narcissists who were otherwise harmless, like the humorless geeks who sat around reading Ayn Rand novels in the college cafeteria.

[LiberalEsto]

24. First, cut funding to Planned Parenthood

Second, pass laws making it harder and harder for women to get family planning services, women's health services, abortion, etc.

Third, cut unemployment benefits and food stamps.

Fourth, propose cuts in benefits to women with "too many children".


What the hell do they expect women to do?
How on earth can a woman without much money prevent pregnancy (including the "gift" of rape) AND still avoid having too many children?

These people are batshit insane

[Moonwalk]

47. You know what they expect: cheap labor, cheap labor, cheap labor....

When you've got a ton of poor people with too many mouths to feed, they will work any number of hours, under any conditions, for any wages. And they'll buy any cheap product you put out, never caring if it's safe or good.

Are they batshit insane or clever like foxes? I'd say they think they're clever...but in the long run (and they never look that far ahead), they are batshit insane, because such desperate situations invariably lead to revolutions where the 1% end up executed. Someone should point out China and Mao Tse Tong to Paul. Lots of poor, hungry people = lots of people marching on those who made them poor and hungry.

[onehandle]

26. The Top 10 Reasons Rand Paul should never start a sentence, 'Had I been president ...'

The Top 10 Reasons Rand Paul should never start a sentence, "Had I been president..."

#10. Half the audience will laugh so hard they won't hear the rest of your comment.

#9. The other half of the audience will cry so hard your remaining words will be lost in their bawling.

#8. Security will remove you as an outside agitator, perhaps even an anarchist.

#7. Your nitwit tea party followers will have to change their "Rand Paul for Emperor" signs. (They have to change them anyway because they misspelled Emperor.)

#6. Sinners will buy up the world's supply of coats, jackets, and blankets, anticipating hell freezing over.

#5. Michele Bachmann will sue you for "Presidential Batshit Crazy" copyright infringement.

#4. World leaders will set their nuclear missiles on high alert.

#3. Capitol police will immediately perform a breathalyzer test on you.

#2. Stocks will plunge, except for the companies that make "The End is Nigh" signs.

And the #1 reason Rand Paul should never start a sentence, "Had I been president ..."

#1. Forget it, dude, ain't gonna happen.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/24/1181630/-The-Top-10-Reasons-Rand-Paul-should-never-start-a-sentence-Had-I-been-president#

[ellie]

27. But no abortion or birth control!

Wow, repukes are sure smart.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

29. I propose a Sociopath test for everyone in public office.

sure, we'd lose 70% of elected officials.. but we'd all be better off.

[undeterred]

32. I second the motion.

[RoccoR5955]

34. We would lose 100% of the teabaggers. n/t

[RoccoR5955]

33. What an idiot.

First of all he wants women to have children even if they have been raped, as well as under any other circumstances, then he wants to cut off benefits to women who have more than a certain number of kids.
Where is the logic in this?
Why do RepubliCONS think that he is so smart, when he comes up with bovine fecal matter like this?

[JeffHead]

35. Who decides how many is too many?

Is Rand Paul suggesting a limit on how many kids you can have much like a certain Communist country is Asia? Limited government my ass.

[TBF]

37. The old white males who like to control everything. nt

[mainer]

36. Why is it always the mothers at fault, and not the deadbeat daddies?

If he wants to cut government benefits, he should start with men who have children they're not supporting.

[brett_jv]

38. But, what ... if you are MARRIED, you can have as many as you want & that's fine?

I guess the asshat thinks that *no matter what*, if there's a husband in the picture, the 'family' is not in poverty/on assistance. It's just ALL 'unwed' mothers that use it, is that it?

I'm actually not entirely against idea's about doing SOMEthing to reduce the # of births in the world as a whole, esp. to parents that can't afford to feed them.

However, I think much more along the lines of preventing the pregnancies in the first place, or allowing them to be terminated (as early as possible). Why isn't RP lobbying for better/cheaper access to BC and/or abortion as needed?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

42. Well sure, because ALL men have money. Didn't you know that?

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

49. I'd be in favor of world governments spending considerable amounts of money

to urge people to stop having children altogether and have them do it voluntarily, warning of the fact that the Earth's population has quadrupled since 1890, but I suppose any government expenditures to educate the people (in addition to providing them with contraception or abortion services) would be objectionable to Mr. Paul.

[PasadenaTrudy]

66. Amen to that! n/t

[JCMach1]

40. Return of the 'Welfare Queen' meme

[Spitfire of ATJ]

41. He can call it the "Anti-Slut Law"....

And remember, "The War On Women" doesn't exist.

[alp227]

50. reminds me of what Lee Atwater said about Republicans and dog whistle racism:

You start out in 1954 by saying, 'Nigger, nigger, nigger.' By 1968, you can’t say ‘nigger’ — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things, and a byproduct of them is blacks get hurt worse than whites.

0:40 here

And since the mid 1970s that analogy has been extended to "welfare" and "illegitimate children".

[awoke_in_2003]

51. Every year I get older...

the more evident it becomes- they think they are our betters. Rec for exposure.

[SunSeeker]

52. Why? I thought Republicans didn't want women using birth control...

Seems to me women who have a dozen kids are doing exactly what Republicans want.

[SoapBox]

53. I say Mr. Rand should be

neutered.

[liberalmuse]

54. This is utterly shameful.

What have we, as a society become when even a small number of us are okay with this? Republicans won't be happy until the poor houses are brought back, and even then, they'll still want to cut back on the gruel served. This is unacceptable, and these heartless, soulless sorry excuses for human beings need to be called out and shamed every single time they start spewing
this Social Darwinian bullshit.

[louis-t]

55. Because....freedom!

[warrior1]

56. thought he said there wasn't a war on women

fucking liar.

[tabasco]

57. And take away their Cadillacs!

Scumbag Paul is pandering to the "Reagan was a national hero" idiot base.

[JDPriestly]

59. So, Rand Paul advocates for family planning while Huckabee opposes paying for women's birth

control.

Sounds like the Republican Party is split on this issue.

[Beacool]

60. Rand Paul is even less likable than his dad.

He will not be the Republican nominee.

Does this idiot think that there aren't married couples with children who are living in poverty? That'll be news to many people who are married, but still struggle to stay above water.

It seems to me that for Rand this is more a value judgment than an economic issue. Single women should be punished for being "sluts". Isn't that along the lines of what Huckabee said the other day?

This has become almost part of the Republican platform. Women can't control themselves and government should not reward their "promiscuous" behavior by providing them with access to family planning. This is such a paternalistic view that it's no wonder that the GOP keeps losing the women's vote.

[cyberswede]

81. Exactly

This statement is absurd:

“Married with kids versus unmarried with kids is the difference between living in poverty and not,” Paul said.

[sadoldgirl]

61. We probably misunderstand this guy

It makes a lot of sense to make women have a lot of children and not feeding them, if you introduce child labor again. Was that not already Gingrich's plan?

[Dopers_Greed]

62. Sen. Paul, to start with...

How about cutting that awful hair, if you're going to cut anything.

[gerogie2]

63. Typical Right Wingers

If the State cuts all support for a single mother with children the mother will abandon the children to the State foster program. Each child in foster care costs the State $40k per year.
This would drive millions of people into homelessness. Does Paul even think about what he proposes?

[thesquanderer]

64. I think the plan is to feed the newborns to the older kids (n/t)

[on point]

65. Maybe max tax deductions for big families subsidized by taxpayers

Besides we need to shrink our world population anyway. Cutting off tax deduction say after 4 children would probably help

[freshwest]

67. But, but, what of their religious duty to fulfill Genesis 1:28? Where is your faith, Rand?

God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it. Rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and every creature that crawls on the earth."

God told everyone to mulitply. His Son, quoted in Matthew chapter 25 from verses 34 through 46, shows it won't go well for Rand. He claims to be a believer. He'll be with the goats.

IOW, he can go to hell. Just sayin'

[EC]

68. Well, maybe the free birth control will help with this

creep. They complain about the pill being free of co-pay on insurance, then they go on and on like this.

[Alkene]

70. Maybe that bully, Rand Paul,...

...is just another, “old fashioned masculine muscular guy.” You know, the type that Brit Hume admires.

"But bullying isn't a masculine virtue; standing up to bullies is. Ignoring society’s least abled people is not masculine; taking care of them is." -Bill Maher

[Turbineguy]

72. Yeah

because being pregnant and raising kids is so fuckin' easy.




Dickhead.

[okaawhatever]

74. Made the comments in response to questions about workforce development. lolz. They don't even

try to make up stories about creating jobs anymore.

[Scuba]

75. Rand Paul Suggests Cutting Benefits For Kids With Too Many Siblings

[cyberswede]

82. +1

[liberal N proud]

76. They just don't get it

You and you but all it does is get you a headache.

[CanonRay]

77. So; cut family planning services, and then when the babies are born, cut food stamps and starve them

Sounds like the ideal Republican policy. Way to go Rand, you're a genius. This should be the 2016 party platform.

[treestar]

78. Why do conservatives care?

Don't they want more people, to have more consumers, and to have more soldiers?

[cyberswede]

83. Fuck Rand Paul

Maybe we should cut government benefits for men who have sex with unwed mothers.

[liberalhistorian]

84. Well, I suggest cutting

salary and benefits for senators and congress critters with too few brain cells. While we'd hardly have anyone left, considering how too many of them are, that might not be a bad thing.

[KamaAina]

87. KamaAina Suggests Cutting Benefits For Uncouth Senators With Ugly Rugs

[dflprincess]

89. Based on what I read in the Star Tribune's comments section whenever this subject is touched upon

Paul, like many of the conservatives commenting at the Strib's site, are not familiar with Clinton's welfare "reforms" that did away with AFDC and replaced it with TANF (Temporary Aid to Needy Families). TANF benefits have a 60 month lifetime limit and, at least in Minnesota, the monthly benefit does not go up if another child is born to the family.