You are so right, maryf, and thanks for bringing this up! It is so depressing to poor people that "progressives" have lost touch with poverty so much that they just repeat the mantras from the RW that are given to the media to repeat. For instance, I used to think that Thom Hartmann was very knowledgeable and wise. But he very rarely even speaks of homelessness, and when he does, he always asserts that homeless people are mostly "mentally ill"!!

This is ignorant, and there is no excuse for it. Both the US Conference of Mayors and the National Coalition for the Homeless cite the figure of 16% of homeless people are "mentally ill". That is within the range of the figure for the general public! If there is no difference between the rate of "mental illness" in the general public, and the homeless population, then why do "progressives" keep repeating this?

"Progressives" pride themselves on doing their homework and learning the true facts rather than repeating the Faux News disinformation......for everything EXCEPT poverty! When it comes to poverty and homelessness, most "progressives" are clueless, and don't even seem to mind being clueless. This is hurting poor people deeply!

In their January 2 issue, The Nation magazine focused the whole issue on poverty (the first "progressive" media to do so!) In their article on Food Stamps, I found this quote, which puts it very clearly:

"Many of the groups that helped fight for the Food Stamp Act still exist and are still fighting valiantly, but here hasn't been much of a movement surrounding them in years. In fact, as progressives dived into the culture and terror wars and all but forgot the anti-poverty wars, there's been barely a glimmer of a movement."

That says it all! Poverty just isn't "sexy", and "progressives" aren't interested.

Then they wonder why more and more poor people are saying "Don't talk to me about voting. You gave up on us, so we're giving up on you."

Cornel West has been saying, "We need to talk about P-O-V-E-R-T-Y!!"

It's waaaay past time for "progressives" to follow West's lead!

Indeed I do think this is what Republicans mean. As an African American man the overt hatred of the poor are represented by an face of color, not white faces, when in fact more whites are poor than any other race in this country. By using our president as "the food stamp president" is a way to again use subtle racism by pretending that it is hatred of the poor that is the issue, *not* racism, when in fact it is racism.

The reason they put a "black" face on poverty is because this is an overt way to foment more hatred of the poor and take away support. If WHITES are the poor ones, well then they would have a harder time saying the poor don't "deserve" assistance, but those "lazy, African Americans" ~ cut 'em off!

Here is how it all began. See at first Welfare came out of Social Security funds for fatherless children and their mothers, first because of the death of a spouse. But during the "war on poverty " those benefits were extended even if the spouse was alive but no longer in the home. While white women were using these services, everything was hunky-dunky. But when more African American women began accessing these funds THEN is when suddenly it was not OK.

If you look at a lot of the literature and flyers coming out of DSHS, you will still see a larger proportion of black and brown faces representing welfare families, not white faces. You will also notice you hardly ever see the a white male face representing poverty (unlike it was in the Depression when there was an "excuse" for white men to be poor because of the lack of work). Yet it is the whites in this country who are the largest proportion of the poor.

Hating those in poverty is an overt racist and sexist action because then it pretends that hating the poor is what it is about no matter what race or whether or not female, when in fact it is not. No longer can anyone discriminate on the basis of race or sex, but they can still legally discriminate on the basis of poverty, so this "covers" it all without having to admit any of those other prejudices. This applies to housing, financial institutions, jobs and pretty much anywhere. Just pretend you hate the poor and you are all good ...

Sad but true ...

Cat in Seattle

It's definitely what they really mean.

It's one of their many dog whistles.

Nevermind that, as it says in the article cited, there were more people added to the Food Stamp roles during W's reign that during Obama's..... it's a dog whistle that works among racists, so it is repeated over and over and over and over.....

I have to also repeat what I write about over and over in hopes somewhere this stuff gets through the American public's head; The truth is, no matter what the race, poverty is *not* a choice, it is an in$titution based on racism, sexism, ageism, classism and disabilities.

Whites, including white males who get caught up in this poverty institution are just considered collateral damage. We can marginalize them as we do the rest of 'em by calling them "mentally ill" when in fact the poor sustain serious PTSD injury from psychic damage out of the conditions of poverty and the harshness of the "help" industry that exploits them adding to the wound. Institutions are kept into place even though they seriously damage individuals and whole communities because they benefit somebody.

There is absolute disdain for the $Billions of dollars worth of labor done for "free" by (mostly) women for care giving. According to labor statistics, women lose on the average of $275,000 worth of paid wages over a life time of paid work because this work that is now codified into law as "doing nothing" under Welfare Reform. That would be enough to make a nice nest egg for her retirement or (horrors) even buy outright one of those empty bank-owned nice houses for herself and her family.

In order for women to work for a wage, if our country were to build institutions to replace the work she does in care giving, this would cost us $Billions ~ and merely be more corporate welfare for corporations who already exploit women making $.70 cents for every man's $1,00.

Poor women, who have always worked for a wage have never been considered to "do anything" while raising their children,. She is caring giving for "free", as many women of all classes have also been doing the 24/7 care for their children, their elders and then their spouses with little or no support, each time having to make the critical (to her) decision to give 24/7 care to a loved one or work for a wage.

I would also like to address the hatred for the poor who have disabilities. They are denigrated for "doing nothing". In most cases not only do these people contribute at great cost to themselves in the high cost of state taxes for which they pay a higher rate of their meager incomes than any other class besides the many other ways they give back to their communities. These taxes keep going higher because of the "trickle down affect" from the feds cutting their funding to the states in order to "save" money, when in fact it is merely passing the buck. This leaves the states having to raise taxes in order to keep the infrastructure going ~ and cut the very services the disabled need in "thanks" for their ever increasing tax-paying sacrifice.

While I know of many, many disabled who try to give back to their communities in many ways, even if they don't do any particular work. For example if only to create jobs for others to care for them and provide them with services for their survival ~ such as with the food stamp industry stretching from the person issuing them to the grocery store taking them and all in between. For every $1.00 of food stamps used it creates a $1.70 for their communities. It is not only food stamps that these folks contribute but in many other ways too that I am not able to mention for the sake of space.

Food stamps or any assistance and the racist connotations are just a way to create more hatred for those who are the least among us. Institutionalized poverty is used to convince people to believe the "only" way to contribute to one's community and world is to work for a wage and that the only thing they can do that is "doing something" is further enriching white CEOs to say, "Do you want fries with that?"

In fact working for those large corporations do little for your community and much less than a woman who care gives and saves $Millions for her neighbors. Large corporations do not bank locally, do not use local businesses for their supplies, nor do they pay taxes. They are often getting tax breaks that do not pay near enough for the infrastructure they use ~ and our city governments continually allow them to pay nothing who actually get taxes back instead. This has been going on for decades.

But a low income woman, especially a woman of color who is caring for a loved one or a disabled person paying dearly for the taxes they pay, why they are "doing nothing". Slap the face of our African American president on that scene and doncha know, they do not deserve any assistance at all.

Cat in Seattle

Siouxrose, I have deep respect for all you talk about in that we face a myriad of issues appearing to overshadow the issues of poverty. But I have to tell you as an activist for many ways Progressives have been just as denigrating as the Right in their practiced ignorance about poverty. They supported and passed into law the very things creating this mess and now pretend they "care" when in my 30-odd years of activism they have been intentionally ignorant about the consequences they were told would happen should they support these things.

Poverty IMO is one of the reasons for the devastation of this planet because of the greed of a few to posses it all for themselves with the applause of Progressives and Conservatives alike. They have instigated the uneven distribution of our resources that cause poverty all around them. They support the ones with laws and tax breaks who prefer to sit on it, rape the land and then pretend there isn't enough to go around rather than have the courage to make those hoarding these things to share it with those in need.

Those in need could be working to preserve some of those things, but again we give to the 1% our tax breaks and resources to "fix it" instead of sharing with all who could be working in tandem to stop it. Such as mega-farms that hog millions of acres of land, pollute and cruelly treat animals rather than let a small farmer do these things in a much more humane and "green" way. Or the tax breaks given to large corporation because they create jobs, when in fact they do not. Progressives have for decades looked the other way and yes Conservatives are worse, but not much worse. While our planet is being used up, they have few questions about why those in power literally give away our resources to the 1% with hardly any questions while applauding that we require the poor have to be Philadelphia lawyers to get a pittance, and the list goes on and on ....

Cat in Seattle

"I don't buy the idea that Progressives hate the poor or have forgotten about poverty"

Well, Siouxrose, whether you "buy" it or not, the fact is, that is the fact. In fact, I posted examples of this, but rather than take issue with any of those examples, and show how it is NOT true, you just claim it is all bunk, and leave it at that.

Space is limited in the comments section, so I couldn't post very many examples. I trusted that true progressives would listen to what I said, and give it credence. I would appreciate it if you would go back to my post and reread the examples I gave, and respond to them. For example: You don't give credence to Cornel West? Then, please say so, and indicate why. You don't believe the quote from The Nation that the few stalwarts who work to save Food Stamps don't have support from the larger "progressive" population? Then please say so, and indicate why. You don't believe people like Thom Hartmann continuously say erroneous things such as "homeless people are mostly mentally ill"? Then please say so and indicate why.

Now, I will post a few more. I will make the assumption that you are willing to engage in the facts and the experience of us poor people, and not just dismiss us out of hand. That is what the RW does, so I don't expect to see that here.

It is the experience of those of us who were poor *before* the financial collapse cannnot get "progressives" enthused about working to overturn poverty. We see on "Progressive" forums others ask for people to take some action on some issue, and receive lots of replies. We do the same for poverty, and receive very few replies.... and very rarely are people willing to take even a simple action.

How's this... many years ago, women took counts of how many times Men were mentioned in popular culture, and compared that with how many times Women were mentioned. As we now know, the results of those counts were staggeringly clear. SO, how about now doing the same thing with POVERTY? As opposed to MIDDLECLASS? Do this even on Commondreams...which has MORE on poverty than many "progressive venues. Don't you see how seldom poverty is mentioned, as compared to other issues?

Over and over we hear and see things about poverty that are clearly UNTRUE, yet, we don't hear the rebuttals on that. If "progressives" understand the truth about poverty, they sure aren't speaking up very loudly about it!

Look at the reactions to this article about "Debunking". Many articles here on Commondreams get 50, 60, 70 and more responses. Poverty articles get much less. ON this one, there are 3 people who are advocates for poverty issues who are responding, and the rest of the responses are negative. Doesn't that say something?

I have often thought about posting a quiz on poverty in a "progressive" venue, and watching people finding it difficult to respond, because they don't know the answers. Would something like that actually get through to people?

" making it exhausting, surreal and demoralizing, all at once."

Indeed! In fact, a very good friend of mine recently came back from a rally in another city and reported that everyone and everything looked "tired". I agree. Exhausting and demoralizing is, indeed, what it is.

Now, given that, I ask you to put yourself in the shoes of a poor person. One who is battling just to stay alive, and has been since before the "Fall Of The Middlieclass". Imagine how it feels to have your own history of poverty ignored. Imagine how it feels to be so totally overlooked and ignored, while all the focus is on those "poor middleclass people who did all the right things, and are now facing poverty." Imagine.

Imagine hearing over and over and over how you don't vote, and yet in the elections of '04 and '08, you stood in line for many hours because your inner city poling place was sabotaged by the RW---voting machines either not working, or "didn't show up". WHY would OUR precinct be targeted in this way? Well, because the RW knows that poor people not only vote, but vote Democratic! Yet, we hear repeatedly how we don't vote, and people like you never stand up and say, "Not true!"

Imagine being homeless and being on a waiting list TEN YEARS LONG for housing. Imagine watching the people in your city protesting in large numbers about the war, but never protesting FOR housing. Imagine.

Imagine having been poor for a long time, and suffering the increasing impossibilities of just surviving, when a new movement springs up and ignites the attention of the press *and* the "progressives". Is the issue about poverty? Of course not... its all about the banks and Wall Street, and somehow, that is supposed to make us feel included. Now we are part of the 99%, but again, if we are included at all, it is in the form of charity like meals and maybe the use of a tent. While there is much education about how the 1% is screwing the country, is there any education about the real facts of poverty? Nope. Where are the Teach-Ins on poverty?

Imagine that we are just as exhausted and demoralized as you are. MORE SO.

Imagine that.

We also have to consider President Obama was given a mess to clean up that was roaring down the pike when he took office. This was the results of decades of the1% getting the majority of these things and loosening laws that protect people and our economy that he had little to do with as a Senator. Yes, I would say as president with a little power to do better, he appointed some foxes to watch the chicken coop, but has done more than the last 4 presidents to stop it as well. It should not have been a "surprise" for any American because we know these laws that were put in place in reaction to the Great Depression in order top prevent what Obama is trying to clean up now.

But again Americans do not have memories any longer than their noses. These post-depression laws were trying to prevent something that took decades to cause the damage and the enormous suffering it did from about the same amount of time it has done now. For 40 years from the 1880s to the 1930s and then again about 40 years from the 1980s to now while there were no such protections for our country's well being and the trouble was delayed. But again this consequence is being ignored and pretended our"Great Recession" happened 15 minutes ago instead of the long slow death both depressions have created.

So that yes Obama's administration may have seen the swelling of people in poverty on steroids in the past few years as a results of policies and laws that have been in effect for the past 4 decades. And don't try to say the consequences of these policies are passing the buck from Obama, they are not.

See, as adults we should know by now that when we do something bad for us,serious consequences will then happen. We know this from our own bodies much less for our communities. We know when we are smoking, eating wrong and not exercising enough, that our bodies may not say a thing until 30 years later. We know we should then not be surprised about the devastating consequences that are ready to ensue.

Therefore no surprise to me Obama is issuing more food stamps, if he is. Just take a look at your own body and then a look at history and BAM! It should then all come into focus and remind you about the physics law that says, "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction ..." This law does not say this "reaction" is immediate but to just expect it is coming ...

Cat in Seattle

Sources. Riiight.

So, here's the problem....

Poverty.

Isn't.

Talked.

About.

In.

The.

Sources.

You.

Like.

The VERY FIRST "progressive" source to even talk about Poverty in a substantial way was the 1-02-12 issue of The Nation!

As I also mentioned, even Thom Hartmann gives WRONG information about homelessness.... does that make it better, because you trust Hartmann?

So, it is now deemed impossible. You discount the sources you don't like, and the sources you DO like either ignore poverty or make false claims.

Since the sources, according to you, aren't there, then its impossible to talk about poverty in a real way.

Since its impossible to talk about poverty in a real way then, the sources you like aren't going to report on poverty.

Since the sources you like aren't reporting on poverty, it is impossible to talk about it.

Got it.