Time to Get Tough (13 page)

There's no telling how much money those missiles will be sold for on the black market. But there's one thing you can bet your bottom dollar on, and that's every terrorist organization will be standing in line to buy them. We know that al Qaeda is already in Libya. Former White House counterterrorism advisor Richard Clark says that the probability of al Qaeda successfully smuggling the missiles out of Libya is “pretty high.”
³³
When the story surfaced, as usual, the White House shrugged its shoulders. “We have ... worked closely with the [Libyan rebel leaders] as well as NATO in investigating and dealing with the issue of conventional weapons in Libya,” said Press Secretary Jay Carney. “We are exploring every option to expand our support.”
³⁴

Nice!

Now here's the worst of it: guess who “discreetly” provided the Libyan rebels with “humanitarian aid” before the fall of Libya's capital, Tripoli? That's right: Iran. When the rebels seized the capital, Iran “congratulated the Muslim people of Libya.”
³⁵

Like everyone else, I'm glad Qaddafi is gone. But if we had been smart and negotiated shrewdly, we would have taken 50 percent of Libya's oil for twenty-five years before we spent mountains of American money. Once again, Obama has proven to be a horrible negotiator and an expert at missing huge opportunities for America. And guess who gets much of that oil from Libya—that's right, it's China, not the U.S.

Americans have been too busy fighting the ravages of the Obama economy to notice what a colossal disaster the community organizer has been as our commander in chief. The damage Obama has done to our military and to our standing in the world can only be repaired by electing a new president, one who respects our men and women in uniform and pursues a national security doctrine that puts America first.

 

 

 

 

I
n 1964, President Lyndon Baines Johnson declared “War on Poverty.” Guess what? Poverty won. Big time.

Since Johnson launched his mythical quest for a government-run utopia, welfare spending has skyrocketed 13 times the amount spent in 1964 (in inflation adjusted dollars). Back then, welfare spending accounted for 1.2 percent of GDP. Today, it's almost 6 percent.
¹
That means taxpayers have paid—are you ready for this?—a jaw-dropping $16 trillion on public-assistance programs.
²
That's a totally outrageous sum—until you realize what Obama wants to spend over the next decade.

In 2011, Obama jacked welfare spending up 42 percent over 2008 levels. This huge increase means America is paying $953 billion a year on welfare.
³
America is flat broke. We cannot afford to spend $10 trillion over the next decade on dependency-inducing welfare schemes that have created an underclass, demoralized it, and drained taxpayers who are paying for programs that not only make poverty worse but that are notoriously rife with fraud and abuse.

You want an example? In 2010, the
Los Angeles Times
reported that welfare recipients in California were using their welfare cards to get cash from ATMs at strip clubs. Taxpayers should not be paying for some guy's lap dance!
⁴
And over in Virginia, taxpayers were outraged when it was revealed that their tax dollars were going to subsidize welfare recipients living in luxury apartments, complete with “resort-style swimming pools with fountains and heated spas, billiard rooms, granite counter tops, indoor basketball courts, and stainless steel appliances.” “These are resort-style amenities that the majority of the taxpayers that are subsidizing it don't have in their own [homes],” said supervisor Pat Herrity. “Luxury has no place in subsidized housing.”
⁵

Look, I believe deeply that America must maintain a sturdy safety net. We have an obligation to take care of those who can't take care of themselves, whether due to age or illness. Our country has a big heart. And it's a point of national pride that we take care of our own. It's one of the things that makes us so great. And certainly our people need a lot more help given that President Obama has been such a total disaster. Today, under this administration, more people than ever in America's history—a staggering 46.2 million—live under the federal poverty line. Many of these individuals
are out of work. They need temporary assistance as they search for the few jobs that remain in the Obama economy. We should help these folks and their kids, no question about it. But it is counterproductive and cruel to allow America's safety net to morph into a hammock. It is simply immoral for the government to encourage able-bodied Americans to think that a life on welfare, of being supported by taxpayers, is an acceptable lifestyle.

Our Founding Fathers understood that self-reliance is the axis on which freedom spins. The American work ethic is what led generations of Americans to create our once prosperous nation. The idea that working hard was a spiritual act of doing one's work “as unto the Lord” spurred us to give our very best day in and day out. And because we believed that work was a virtue, we produced massive wealth, plentiful jobs, and a self-sufficient society.

That's what I find so morally offensive about welfare dependency: it robs people of the chance to improve. Work gives every day a sense of purpose. A job well done provides a sense of pride and accomplishment. I love to work. In fact, I like working so much that I seldom take vacations. Because I work so hard, I've been privileged to create jobs for tens of thousands of people. And on my hit show
The Apprentice
, I get to work with people from all walks of life. I'm known for my famous line, “You're fired!” But the truth is, I don't like firing people. Sometimes you have to do it, but it's never fun or easy. One of my favorite parts of business is seeing how work transforms people into better, more confident, more competent individuals. It's inspiring and beautiful to watch.

America became a powerhouse because of our deep belief in the virtue of self-reliance. As Thomas Jefferson said, “I predict future happiness for
Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” Government wasn't created to take care of us. Generations of Americans believed they should be responsible for themselves. When hard times hit, churches and neighbors pitched in and pulled together to help. But in the end, the Founders believed that government should only do those few things individuals couldn't do for themselves. We are rapidly losing that self-reliant spirit that made America great.

Real economic pain exists in America. No doubt about that. And we need pro-growth, pro-jobs policies. But it's also important for us not to lose sight of the bigger picture. Obama tries to justify his massive spending programs in part based on the idea that they're needed to eradicate poverty in America, but as Dinesh D'Souza, author of the bestselling book
What's So Great about America
, points out, America is one of the few places in the world where a “poor” person can still be obese.
⁶
“Poor” is a relative term. By global standards, poor people in America are rich. And even by American standards, poor people today are better off than average people were in our parents' lifetimes. According to a Heritage Foundation study, “Today, poor boys at ages 18 and 19 are actually taller and heavier than boys of similar age in the general U.S. population in the late 1950s. They are one inch taller and some 10 pounds heavier than GIs of similar age during World War II.”
⁷
Poor people in America have comforts most of the world's poor have never seen, as the Heritage Foundation reports:

Does this mean that poor Americans aren't in need of help, most especially a job? No, of course not. But it does mean that Americans should never lose sight of the fact that we are incredibly blessed to live in a
nation where 97 percent of those considered poor own a color television and have the electricity to power it.
⁹

The innocent bystanders of American poverty are kids. Yet two-thirds of childhood poverty in America is absolutely preventable if individuals did just one thing: get married before they have children. As someone once put it, “Marriage is the greatest ‘anti-poverty' program God ever created.”

An out-of-wedlock child is six times more likely to live in poverty than a child born in a two-parent home. The reason for this is painfully obvious: two paychecks are twice as much as one. This isn't brain surgery. Two people working full-time at Walmart puts a family above the federal poverty line (defined as a family of four earning less than $22,314, not including in-kind benefits). The key thing is for the father to stick around, which is what marriage is meant to ensure. Both parents don't necessarily have to hold down a job. One paycheck from a gainfully employed dad, with mom at home taking care of the kids, is better than a single mother living off welfare.

The explosion of out-of-wedlock births in America is staggering. This is a total departure from American history—one that is reshaping our country, and not for the better. Back when LBJ began engineering his “Great Society” and declaring his “War on Poverty,” only 7 percent of kids were born out of wedlock. Today, 40 percent of all births in America are to unwed mothers. Government is now the “father” in far too many homes. But here's the thing: kids don't just need a wallet—they need a dad who
will teach boys how to be responsible men and show daughters what it means to be respected and protected.

Out-of-wedlock birth rates are not only one of the greatest generators of poverty but of inequality in America. Twenty-nine percent of white children are born to a single mother (a figure that's far too high), but 72 percent of black children are born out of wedlock. Beyond the economic consequences, we know that kids without a dad are also exponentially more likely to abuse drugs, drop out of school, commit crime, and be incarcerated.
¹⁰
Kids who grow up in homes where a magic check appears each month from the government believe there's nothing wrong with sitting at home doing nothing while taxpayers bust their humps working to fund them. For an entire generation, government welfare programs are eradicating the virtues of responsibility, hard work, and self-reliance that built America.

Luis Lopez is a Democrat and youth counselor in Florida. He tells the story of an exchange he had with a 13-year-old pregnant girl he met in an inner-city, low-income housing project. He asked who was going to pay for her baby. Smiling, she said, “Medicaid and Social Security will pay for it.” “What about the father?” “We broke up,” she said. The girl went on to explain that her grandmother would raise her child. Then Lopez asked the pregnant teen what her mom thought about the fact that she was so young and pregnant. “My mom had me when she was 14,” the girl replied. “So what's the problem?”
¹¹

It wasn't always this way. A lot of us remember a time when there was a social stigma and sense of shame against living on the public dole. There's a great scene in the movie
Cinderella Man
with Russell Crowe that
illustrates how radically our entitlement culture has changed America. The movie is based on the true story of boxer James J. Braddock, a fighter during the Great Depression who goes on to become heavyweight champion of the world. As Braddock struggles to establish his boxing career, he eventually has to turn to public assistance to feed his wife and kids. He's deeply embarrassed and ashamed, but he has no other options, so he accepts the money. Later, as his boxing career takes off and the prize money starts rolling in, Braddock returns to the welfare office and stands in line patiently. When he reaches the front of the line, he hands the welfare worker a stack of cash to pay back the government the money he had received to support his kids. That really happened. But today, given our entitlement culture, we can hardly imagine something like that except in the movies.