How the Boston Herald made a domestic terrorist the face of welfare

[float=right]IMAGE([/float] Leave it to the Boston Herald to use the recent tragedy of the Boston Marathon bombing for politics, the politics of transitional assistance also known as welfare. Say what? What does domestic terrorism and welfare have to do with each other?

Well, yesterday the legislature on Beacon Hill was debating a budget and Republicans are, once again, trying to use welfare as a wedge issue. Also yesterday, Chris Cassidy at the Boston Herald broke a front page news story that deceased Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev was a welfare recipient. Sounds bad, right?

But as a legal resident with a US citizen wife and US citizen daughter, and an income lower than a certain level, he was qualified to receive the benefit. There is no scandal, there is just conservatives using welfare and the tragedy of the Boston Marathon bombing for politics.

The state’s Executive Office of Health and Human Services said the benefits that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had received ended in 2012 when the couple stopped meeting income eligibility limits.

This is not the first year the Boston Herald has tried to put an unpopular face on welfare benefits. [float=right]IMAGE([/float]Sometimes the villains are immigrants, as in this Herald cover from House budget debate week in 2010.

From villainizing immigrants to exploiting the Boston Marathon bombing, conservatives resort to the same playbook of putting an unpopular face on programs they like to exploit for political advantage.



Free tagging: 



By on

So the point of the post is not to politicize the issue and you link to your article that is a political screed but for the other side?

Boston Herald's despicable exploitation of domestic terrorism

By on

Responding to the Boston Herald's despicable exploitation of domestic terrorism in a political debate over welfare is not 'politicization' unless he uses the same despicable tactics. I see facts and reason when I read that piece not screed, but good try.

Go ahead and explain why you call it 'screed'

By on

Go ahead and explain why you call it 'screed' or even why you claim it's a 'politicized response,' (as opposed to political argument.)

Did he use minorities -- Blacks, Asians, Hispanic, illegals or terrorists -- and link them to welfare?

How did he 'politicize'?


By on

If you don't think this was political or a screed - you don't know the definition of either term.

you haven't made an argument

By on

you haven't made an argument that justifies calling it a screed. you've simply used the word as an epithet. feel free to write a post about the so-called screed ...somewhere else. this post is about the Boston Herald politicizing the welfare funding debate using the face of domestic terrorism.

Get back to me

By on

a) after you register
b) in a time and place where I'm in the mood to debate politics

this ain't it

you got nothing.

By on

I'll take your response as an admission that you can't make an argument that the article you called a screed is a screed.

I stand with Boston, This is our fucking city.

I stand with the 13% of Commonwealth citizens who need and gets welfare assistance.

I stand against the people who take it and don't qualify for it, not as villains but as grifters.


By on

Where did you find those quotes? In Hester's political screed. Like I said - tell me how linking to that piece on "progressive" positions and values is NOT political and then tell me how to any non-progressive it is not long and tedious or in other words a political screed. It is what it is and no more appropriate in this context than the herald's piece politicizing the recent tragedy. Do yourself a favor and invest in a dictionary.

This isn't about Welfare Fraud

By on

This isn't about people scamming the system. This is about the American taxpayer inadvertently funding terrorism.

So now we find out that the entire Tsarnaev family (Dad, Mom, 2 sons & 2 daughters) started receiving government assistance as soon as they set foot in our country. As political refugees they were entitled to settlement assistance from day one. (Section 8 Housing, public healthcare, food stamps etc.) Then their stellar older son impregnates and marries the daughter of a doctor, and this new little Muslim family receives 18 months of government assistance. They only came off welfare after the naive young “wife” starts working 70 hours a week while husband Tamerlan stays home and builds bombs and plans to kill and injure the very Americans who have paid for his pathetic existence for the past 12 plus years.

A Breakdown of your and my investment into the Tsarnaev Family:
Section 8 housing
Free public healthcare
Food stamps and other EFT transfer payments
Federal Pell Grants for both sons and most likely their daughters as well. (That is $5200.00 per year for each son or daughter who attended a college.)
City of Cambridge also awarded a $2500 per year scholarship to the younger son.
Younger son also reportedly was receiving state college scholarship.

What did we receive for our investment:
- Older son was arrested for domestic battery on a former girlfriend.
- The mother was arrested last year for shoplifting $1600 in merchandise from a Lord & Taylor store. Mother is facing immediate arrest for failure to appear regarding this matter.
- Then of course we know that the two sons combined to kill four people (3 Americans & a Chinese exchange student), severely injure 100 plus other people, carjacked another victim and only let him live when they found out that he was not an American citizen.
- Now we have the two pathetic parents who have returned to Russia and are claiming that their poor sons are innocent and are being framed by the same American government that allowed for their pathetic existence the past 12 plus years.

When are we going to put a stop to this madness?? And when the hell are you bleeding heart liberals going to wake up to facts. Wasn't over 3,000 innocent American deaths enough for you or are you going to wake up when 30,000 are dead, 300,000 are dead, or 3 million are dead?

"This isn't about people scamming the system"

By on

"This isn't about people scamming the system."

I agree, all six were legal residents or citizens; the dead brother, the dead brother's wife and child, the younger brother and the parents. It appears they didn't come to America to do harm. The younger boy was in grade 3 when they came. As far as we know, 2 of them committed the acts of terrorism not the other four. Is this about the American taxpayer inadvertently funding terrorism? Not by a long shot. Does it push your buttons to know taxpayers helped this family pay for food, shelter and education? Yes. Especially the younger brother, who is in custody, and older brother but not his wife and child.

I absolutely

By on

disagree with the Heralds approach. However welfare is a huge issue in this state and the Herald childish antics does not negate the fact that tax payers are being taken advantage of.

I absolutely agree. But as

By on

I absolutely agree.

But as long as critics continue their shrill antics instead of reasoned, intelligent arguments for reform nothing will change.

No one wins when the press doesn't behave in a professional manner.

Look, anytime anyone even

By on

Look, anytime anyone even hints at Welfare reform the shrill crys of "you hate the poor" "evil republican's" come to mind. There can be a thoughful and successful approach to reform, meaning those that are in need are taken care of. Neither side can seem to find a way for an intellegent conversation. We should be better able to help the elderly, infirm and those without means to help themselves. I imagine a streamlined functioning government that does what it is supposed to do.

There is a happy medium between the Globe which refuses to discuss any refome issue, and the Herald. I also think that's where you find most of the voters/citizens.

Massachusetts passed EBT reforms last year

By on

Massachusetts passed EBT reforms last year. I don't think I heard one person say "you hate the poor" "evil republican's"

I heard Mitt Romney say 47% of Americans are takers who feel entitled. I think he's wrong and I think he's an asshole. Moreover, as the Republican candidate for the US, comments like that can lead reasonable people to think Republicans hate the poor.

The reforms are a joke. As

By on

The reforms are a joke. As long as people can take cash directly out off the cards there will be no accountability. All the voter registration forms which bounced off the EBT role list and the number of supposedly stolen cards which have to be reissued every year should have been a hint the integrity of the system was questionable.

cite some hard facts

By on

you don't know what you're talking about. cite some hard facts, then we hash this out.

Roslindale Food Mart

By on

Has a ATM which you can withdraw cash using your EBT Card turn around, walk to 10 feet to their beer fridge pay and walk out..... I have seen it, and at one point the ATM machine had a HUGE sticker that said "EBT Cash Withdrawal".


By on

Is this the same argument where people get mad because people use EBT to buy fresh produce, meat, or on sale lobster; rather then Doritos, Mt Dew and Mc'D's?

Also, look at my comment above. The vast majority of people on welfare have some income streams. Limiting use of EBT will do nothing, because cash is fungible.

I guess that 90% of them having modern applicance, such as a stove and fridge, is also some sort of proof they're all cheats and freeloaders, amirite?

They need to let us whip them and ask for more, like the begging plebs they are. Only then will we shower them with bread.

anon2 proves my point about

By on

anon2 proves my point about both sides not able to come to reasonable, fruitful discussions.

not rational

By on

Anon, do you know what "Fungible" means?

Hint, nothing dealing with salves or creams.

This is the most egregious

By on

This is the most egregious case. But this state does have an issue with subsidizing criminal lifestyles by paying able bodied people to not work. The state should not be providing benefits to convicted felons or non-citizens. Permanent legal residency shouldn't even exist, you should either be a citizen or not, not some 2nd class in-between.

Something needs to be done about people migrating across state lines to game benefits too. A requirement for a minimum duration of instate residency prior to receiving benefits would help knock that crap off. Require all applicants to pay net positive state taxes before eligibility would be nice too.

So you say

By on

this state does have an issue with subsidizing criminal lifestyles by paying able bodied people to not work

So you say but I don't see any evidence of this. Show us.


By on

You should get out more. By your response i can tell two things...

1) You are not originally from the city.

2) You very rarely leave you own microcosm of a neighborhood to travel through lower socioeconomic areas.

sure thing

By on

Sure thing, mr bleeding heart. Just Google problem properties Boston and tell me if any of those, not counting allston student slums, are market-rate housing.

actually, that list shows bad land lords

By on

Most low income people do not own housing but rent, and what you posted show that they live in areas with negligent land lords which makes their situation worse. As anon asked, show hard evidence or stop trolling.

Are you for real?

By on

Those are section 8 (i.e. government-subsidized) rentals, are you telling me the landlord is responsible for all the drug dealing and violence done by the tenants? Un-effin-believable. And thanks to MA's excellent progressive housing laws, it's next to impossible to evict a problem tenant. Any other arguments proving state does not subsidize criminal lifestyle?

Section 8 is federally funded

By on

Commonwealth has MRVP vouchers, but nowhere near the number of Section 8 vouchers in play. The better allegation is that the US funds Section 8 participants who game the system and commit crimes.

And yes, evicting problem tenants in MA is difficult and at times impossible due to tenant-friendly laws and in Boston, the sheer number of law-school housing clinics and accessibility to legal services. The Boston Housing Court also tends to be severely biased AGAINST landlords (and housing authorities), so those who do have to litigate in Boston Housing Court are at a supreme disadvantage.

A landlord can bring an eviction case in District Court, but the tenant always has the right to remove it to Housing Court if they live within a jurisdiction, making it was waste of time to even bother trying for a better outcome in District Court.

None whatsoever

By on

Seeing as the state is one of the best for lowering crime rates, best in education, has a huge GDP, and yes, takes care of it's poor.

Doesn't mean we can't do better. But I love when teabaggers try to claim this state is a cesspool. They must not get out much.

The state has a massive debt

By on

The state has a massive debt to GDP ratio and is unfortunately a house of cards because of it.

You don't seem

By on

to understand debt as it applies to states, countries and businesses. Don't EVER open a business.

You're good with credit cards though!

Point in case the "best" state is.... #50, Nebraska. Who the hell is pineing to move there? Also, what happens when we remove farm and other subsidies that are taken from MA and sent there?


By on

Massachusetts has a total state debt of approximately $102,258,050,000, when calculated by adding the total of outstanding official debt, pension and other post-employment benefits (OPEB) liabilities, Unemployment Trust Fund loans, and the FY2013 state budget gap

GDP is 350 BILLION a year.

Live in public housing for a

By on

Live in public housing for a year or wait in line at a supermarket service window that offers check cashing and you will see all the evidence you need.

The regular drug dealers and

By on

The regular drug dealers and gang bangers are pretty obvious if you live in the neighborhood dumbass. Everyone knows who they are. Not that it makes it any easier for the police to play whack a mole arresting them.

How about you prove that

By on

How about you prove that there isn't EBT fraud? If you want people to cite evidence, cite some evidence yourself!

That's not how it works,

By on

That's not how it works, Sparky.

Or, to put it another way: We'll prove there's no welfare fraud as soon as you prove there's no Santa Claus. Go on, bring me back some cold hard evidence, so I can handwave it away and insist, increasingly shrilly, that you're just playing straight into the hands of Big (Little?) Elf.

Hi Mitt

By on

You must know from your time at Harvard Law, you can't prove a negative.

I completely agree with the

By on

I completely agree with the above, but I find it really funny how conservatives are all up in arms about "criminal baby mommas in the projects," yet they have nothings against perfectly able-bodied Billybob and Marylou who have been on welfare their whole life having 10 babies because using contraceptives is against their religion. Both sides buying votes, nothing new here.

Not to many

By on

Trailer parks in Boston, only one! Projects and section-8 apartments, couldn't being to grasp that number. That may be why your brother Billybob is never mentioned!

Whats the huge issue?

By on

Seen this kind of talk before, but it ultimately just degenerates into red Herring Baby Mommas and Welfare Queens.

I do remember an article where some abuse was found, but when pitched against the total number of transactions (which wasn’t reported), the “Fraud” was around 0.5% of the total. The article also didn’t go into how much it cost to police that fraud.

There’s always going to be a few leaks in the dam. The idea is to keep it structurally sound, and not go crazy with maintenance to the point that it’s fiscally irresponsible upkeep.

I’m reminded of Florida where random drug testing is costing the state TEN TIMES the savings of kicking people of the rolls. And the fact that they found those on welfare were actually using drugs at a lower rate than the general population. How is that sound policy? How is it fiscially responsible?

The huge issue here boils

By on

The huge issue here boils down to that he was more than capable of working, but instead had his wife working 80 hours. Couldn't he have gone down to the Home Depot in Watertown and gotten SOME kind of job rather than mooching off the system? That is their thing, right? Supporting Olympic hopefuls.

You must have missed the part of the post

By on

You must have missed the part of the post where it says that he, who was in the US legally, and his US citizen wife and his US citizen daughter qualified based on family income, until in 2012 they made more and no longer qualified.

And before that? Bet he

By on

And before that? Bet he couldn't cash those checks quick enough. Why work when the State will pay for everything?

There's no scandal

By on

There's no scandal. He and his family qualified.(US citizen wife and US citizen daughter.)

Reading comprehension

By on

Take a deep breath. The article states they haven’t been on it since they didn’t meet the requirments, which is directly referencing the wife working 80 hours a week.

Which also points to a problem with welfare. Minimum wage is less than poverty, and normally kicks you off the rolls. The problem isn’t welfare, but the bottom end of our Economy and it’s inability to offer a path to self suffeciency for a large number of people.

How about instead of worrying about welfare that seems to be working, that we worry about people getting paid a living, fair wage for their labor and service? (and not just the poor, we're all getting the shaft). Maybe lets talk about expanding the EITC (work pays), but I have a feeling the people who support it now will turn on a dime as soon as it’s implmented, just as Romney did. Suddenly people that are being subsidised for their work, instead of just on the dole are called moochers and freeloaders again.

It’s also questionable because it most likely drives down wages and subsidises low wage employers, which isn’t a good thing unless you’re the boss (who ends up paying it in on taxes anyways)

I think Auditor Bumps

By on

I think Auditor Bumps estimate for "wasted" welfare monies was in the ballpark of $25 million.

Maybe that's not much to you, but I imagine what that $25 mill could go for: heating assistance, meal programs for kids at school in need, hey - even maybe the T....

I would think people who call themselves progressives would be all that much more interested in making sure money was being used correctly. Again, 25 million could have done a lot.
Not to mention the "missing" recipients only found out by that mailing Warren's daughter organized. I don't think they've finished that audit but it may lead to even more money that could be directed in a better way. I don't think blindly defending the program is helping anyone.

You're surprised

By on

The minute I heard the couple had a child and the mom was working 80 hours a week as a home health aid I figured this couple had forms of various government assistance and it would come out somewhere that this guy was basically using public funds to buy explosives to hurt the people that were helping him. Brings biting the hand that feeds you to an entirely new level.

While this is perhaps beyond the pale - it's certainly not beyond the Boston Herald. This isn't shocking - it was inevitable.

I had no idea

By on

He stopped getting welfare in 2012. On what basis do you claim he used "public funds to buy explosives to hurt the people that were helping him."

The Herald made a terrorist the face of welfare. That's despicable politicization of the welfare debate. In the past they chose illegals, Asians and blacks as their face of welfare.

You claim a terrorist used public funds to finance terrorism with no basis in fact. I had no idea you were such an asshole.

Hypocrisy of our friend anonymous

I found it abhorrent of the herald to use this event to advance their agenda, however correct they may be. But where were you the DAY AFTER THE BOMBINGS when Barney Frank dropped the following on TV?:

“I’m glad you raised that, because it gives me a chance to make a point I’ve felt strongly about. In this terrible situation, let’s be very grateful that we had a well-funded, functioning government. It is very fashionable in America, and has been for some time to criticize government, belittle public employees, talk about their pensions, talk about what people think of their expensive health care. Here we saw government in two ways perform very well. First of all, the city government in charge performed efficiently and rapidly and bravely. Secondly…as you’ve shown on the program, you don’t know when it’s state and when it’s federal and when it’s the city. The police commissioner on the screen would be ahead of the FBI, and then the governor. And that also goes for the recovery. Again, I never was as a member of Congress one of the cheerleaders for less government, lower taxes. No tax cut would have helped us deal with this or will help us recover. This is very expensive. You have adequately described thousands and thousands of people examining every parcel…providing medical care. What I’m asking people is, whether you have private health insurance or not, whether you can afford this or not, maybe the government’s going to have to pay for it. This is an example of why we need, if we’re going to be a civilized society, to put some of our resources into a common pool.”

slight difference

By on

Whether or not the bombers were receiving welfare has no bearing on what they did. They were going to do it, regardless of public benefits received.

Whether or not we fund our government services has a huge impact on whether we are able as a society to respond to these events. Granted, the folks who toe the "best govt is no govt" line are usually excepting the militarization of our security forces which we saw on full display this past week. But the point is that there is a link to functional govt emergency and security services and the taxes that fund them. The link between welfare and terrorism? It's only present in the twisted little minds of the Herald editors.

both were cases of politicizing the event

Thats my only point.

And its the only aspect of the herald's story I find problematic. Otherwise they are correct in their story of stating that this crimincal collected benefits just as Barney was correct in his statement.

are you slow?

He is quick to point out the Herald politicizing the marathon bombings but was silent when good ole Barney too the first show last tuesday.


By on

You think Barney Frank is integral to a story about how the Boston Herald made a domestic terrorist the face of welfare?

Abscence of proof

By on

Abscence of proof is not proof of the contrary.

Not posting about Barney Frank's statement is not agreement with him having made it. Thus, hypocrisy is not in evidence.

are you slow?

He is quick to point out the Herald politicizing the marathon bombings but was silent when good ole Barney too the first shot last tuesday.

Liberal nonsense

By on

Is this posting a joke?

I think the point the Herald was trying to make, quite legitimately, was that the TERRORIST (poor, downtrodden terrorist) displayed a vast amount of HATRED towards America, both in his writings, his YouTube postings, and of course his murder of 4 innocent people and maiming of hundreds of others, yet he was quite willing to TAKE money from us here in America to subsidize his lifestyle.

1. He took money from us, but proclaimed his hatred of us, killed and maimed us.

2. He had an expensive car according to media reports, which would belie his need for funds.

3. His poor, abused wife was working 70-80 hours a week while he hung out in a boxing ring which is just pathetic.

4. "Taking" with no regard for others seems to run in his family - note his mother who shoplfted some $1600 worth of merch from Lord & Taylor.

While the Herald would be wrong to condemn everyone who needs public assistance and tar them with the same brush, I think condemning this Jihadist loser is warranted.

What is wrong with Anonymous and people of his or her ilk on this board that political correctness has so blinded tham that they can't see this?!

Any post that starts with your subject line

Is most certainly a joke.

The Herald comment section welcomes you ----------------->>>>>>>

Oh, with "liberal" hurled as an insult, "political correctness" and other buzzterms, I think I have BINGO!

Try commenting

By on

on the actual substantive content of my posting before you start addressing just buzzwords that set off liberals.

Can't really argue with the content, can you?

Well Swirly

By on

you post does nothing to add to a discussion while the other Anon's is rational and not riddled with one-line insults.

And ...

... I'm sure Mr. Socky, the Left Sock, surely must agree with Mr. Socko on the right. The socks agree and you win!

Try getting a log in if you want us regulars to think there are more than one of you supporting yourself.

But relegating him to the Herald's comment hell...

By on

Isn't a patented ad hominem attack and actually elevates the discussion?

Hurry up and grab those Faux News, and Carl Rove insults, before somebody else gets there ahead of you.

Connecting Race and Terrorism to Welfare, Right Here in Boston

By on

I don't think his beliefs matter one iota as to whether he'd apply for and take welfare for himself, wife and daughter.

It is shameful of the Boston Herald to make this non-scandal front page news the same week MA Republicans are debating the budget. The Boston Marathon bomber is not what's wrong with our welfare system. Pretending it is, means the conversation about welfare will not be fact based, it will be fear based.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his brother grew up in the US. They went to high school in Cambridge. Tamerlan was here legally. His wife, daughter and brother are US Citizens. The brothers committed a horrible crime and tried to terrorize the city of Boston and the United States. Making Tamerlan the face of the welfare debate was a shameful act by the Boston Herald.

They've done it before. They've tried to make blacks, Asians, and illegals the face of welfare.

Herald story outstanding

By on

Count me among the many who wonder how the two Islamic terrorists financed their atrocities. Kudos to the Herald for revealing one source of their income. It's certainly easier to obtain guns, gunpowder, nails, pressure cookers and the expensive European cars they were said to drive when the state is buying the groceries. Another testament to Ted Kennedy's Immigration Reform Act of 1965 that opened our borders to the Third World. Great job, Ted.

Bravo, sir.

By on

Islamophobia, hilariously provincialism, casual racism, a completely inaccurate slur against a Kennedy (and the civil rights movement itself!), and a proud, loudly proclaimed ignorance of both the history and politics of immigration, all in a single paragraph. Rarely do I get to say this, but you've done a better job caricaturing yourself and the frothing masses on the right than I ever could have, Fish.


By on

but I am not hearing any of the liberals out here commenting on the fact that PEOPLE WHO HATE, KILL, AND MAIM US HAD NO PROBLEM TAKING $$ FROM US.

How can liberals justify this?

I don't understand the

By on

I don't understand the argument, or the expected resolution.

We shouldn't give anybody money because they might secretly hate us?

We should troll every benefit recipient's social media postings to see if they secretly harbor hatred of us? Maybe we should tap their phones or just interview all their friends if they're not sufficiently forthcoming in social media?

Or we should have every recipient swear on the religious or other beloved object of their choice that they love us all and are really good people? (But then what about people who lie? I guess we're back to (1) or (2) above.)


By on

The world is black and white. Everyone else is bad, and I'm good. So frak everyone else! But not me.

Yup. This is Modern Conservative logic folks.

99.99% of welfare recipients didn't attack us last week. But because one DB did, we should kick all the brown ones or ones who are Muslim off the rolls.

Can’t be too safe, right?

lets lock up some Japanese while we’re at it. They used to be our enemies after all. Russians too, cause Palin made them scary again. Except when they give us Intel about their enemies. Then we should trust every word they say!



By on

There's nothing to justify. As regards Tsarnaev all the Herald article told us is that his politics and actions were inconsistent and that he was not a respectable upstanding person. OK. We already knew that. We agree on that.

What all the "liberals" are angered about is that by making it a front page story and making Tsarnaev the face of welfare, the Herald acted shamefully and irresponsibly to the detriment of already marginalized persons who have nothing to do with Tsarnaev and are not terrorists.

How do you not understand this?


By on

Your generation is dying off. Young people aren't afraid of foreigners, gays, black people, Asians...

Don't forget that other Catholic Terrorist

John Salvi murdered my neighbor, Shannon Lowney, when she was in her late 20s, and another woman in her 30s. Gunned down in cold blood in their places of work.

Oh, and for the record: Timothy McVey was Catholic, too, and requested a Catholic chaplain for his execution.

Oh please, you are comparing

By on

Oh please, you are comparing .0001% of terror incidents compared to the ideology responsible for 99%

Shouldn't you be more concerned with the brutal oppression of women in the Islamic world?

You're an

By on

idiot, religion was not the main factor! You know maybe people who happened to be Catholic were pissed a foreign nation who happened to be mostly Protestant was occupying half their country.

You really want to open that can of worms?

By on

Or are you saying that religion plays no role in, say, Palestine?

No, of course not, because those are Moslems, and everything they do is conditioned on religion, as opposed to Northern Ireland, where people are so much more rational and all that violence had absolutely nothing to do with whether or not they have stars on their bellies, um, how they feel about transubstantiation.

Also, last I checked, 6 is not half of 32. But don't let math get in the way of your rantings.

So what your saying

By on

Is even if England didn't invade N. Ireland the Catholics still would have attached protestant's. Religion played a part but it was not the agitator.

Please cite one Islamic

By on

Please cite one Islamic country where women have equal rights to men and there isn't brutal gender inequality.

You love demanding citations from others but will never produce one yourself.

Cite a "Christian" country where this is true

ElSalvador is VERY Christianized, with their government advised by the Catholic Church:

Remember also: biblical "inferiority" was used to suppress voting by women and even the owning of property by women in the US until the 20th century.

And we'll just ignore all the lovely attempts in our own country in the last year to force women to bear children - even if those children are killing them - and to force women who work for "Christian" employers to forgo pretty much any and all medical care that has to do with all those icky women parts because touching woman parts might cause an abortion.

The problem isn't *their* religion - the problem is putting religion in charge of policy. Christians have no leg to stand on here.


Female heads of state

By on

The two largest predominantly Muslim countries on earth, Indonesia and Pakistan, have both elected women as head of state.


By on

Hmm, let go ask our buddy Britian who was resposible for their 99%...

(Hint, not muslim)

Not sure Whitey kept an

By on

Not sure Whitey kept an entire neigborhood in terror. He operated in the neighborhood he grew up in. The Bulger family was well known. Also, don't forget he was credited with keeping drugs out of Southie.

Many people thought of Whitey as some kind of Robin Hood. Agree or Disagree with that, remember Southie was quite a different place in the 60's through 80's.

Tell that to the families of his victims

By on

But, yes, you're right, Whitey was not what we think of as a modern terrorist, well, if you discount his gun running to the IRA - he preferred to keep his murders personal, because that's just the sort of sociopath he is.

McVeigh might be a better example. Or maybe we can compare Islamic terrorists with Catholic child rapists. Or Jewish gangsters of the 1930s. Or Hindu mosque destroyers. But let's not. My main point is I'm tired of people blaming everybody who adheres to a particular religion with the actions of a few. Almost all religions have believers who have done truly horrible things. I'm not going to respond to Herald hysteria and blame all Muslims for the actions of two morons who somehow figured out how to build bombs.

I agree completely. But,

By on

I agree completely. But, unfortunately I see that people who claim the moral high ground on this subject do tend to generalize as well. I see that in this particular topic today.

Maybe that's why there will never be a productive conversation that will benefit anyone.

Yes, but...

By on

Are they not afraid to go on a casual stroll along Blue Hill Ave and some of the side streets after dark? Alone, with nothing but their shiny new iPhone and $300 dre headphones. Or can they only whine about getting kicked out of their $4000/month Exeter apartments for a few days while the whole city was searching for two madmen? Bigotry, xenophobia and racism are wrong, but PC blindness is downright idiotic.

Liberalism is a political philosphy, not a death wish

By on

Hey, as a young kid, I did campaign work for McGovern. I drive a Prius. That doesn't mean I want to stand at the corner of Melnea Cass and Tremont at 2 a.m. waving my phone (Android, thank you very much) around.

So? I doubt very much you'd want to walk down my street at 2 a.m., either.

Unlike the frothing right, which wishes nothing more than that poor people, especially ones with accents and darker skins, be herded into the nearest ocean to drown (hey, how's that for a stupid stereotype?), liberals accept that things are not perfect and want to do something to help things improve. Mistakes? Sure. I'll take a Bobby Kennedy walking through Bed-Stuy over some dimbulb Arkansas state rep trying hard not to get spittle all over himself as he fulminates about Boston liberals any day.

Exactly, but we have quite a

By on

Exactly, but we have quite a few posters here scream racism whenever anyone says crime is more prevalent in neighborhoods with a lot of subsidized housing. You know, fellas who would label the author of a racist wingnut from the comfort of their million dollar Cambridge condos, paid for by mommy and daddy.

We do?

By on

Here I thought people were just getting mad when posters making that claim aren't referencing the poor, but that darky can't behave himself.

There's plenty of us Libs that think housing projects are terrible ideas, as has been prove from facts. But we also know it has NOTHING to do with race, religion, or creed. The Irish and Italian ghettos had similar problems back in the day, and similar assholes claiming those "dgos" were subhuman.

in the name of national security

By on

Lots of bad decisions are made in the name of national security. I join you in opposing FDRs incarceration of Japanese-Americans in the name of national security. It was fear that motivated the bill. It's funny how Republicans have to go back to 1940's to identify a bad decision made in the name of national security when we just concluded eight years of the Bush presidency, in which Republicans unlearned all of the lessons the country learned from war in the last 100 years; and willfully violated most of the international laws and treaties that govern war. Torture is a dark stain on this country. And so is taking a pass on prosecuting those who authorized it.

Talk about stereotypes! I am

By on

Talk about stereotypes! I am guessing I am a bit older than you and I do take offense at your generalization that older people are afraid of foreigners, gays, black people, etc.....

You know nothing and I do hope you refrain from making such sweeping generalizations in the future. Many of us older folks have gay family members, mixed ethnic families and to assume we are "afraid" is insulting.

Were they indeed 'collecting'?

By on

Than the Herald is correct. Everybody must of known the family, the 'boys' were collecting social service entitlements. In fact, the family honestly sounds like a crew of scheming gypsies pulling con after con.

There are people who really need the help in our state and country. I personally have no problem with helping those in genuine need or down on their luck. Unfortunately, the system has been politicized for at least the past 40 years. And EVERYBODY knows there's a lot of BS going on.

And why are we importing so many 'poor' immigrants

By on

who require massive amounts of government assistance? Why? This makes absolutely no commonsense. None whatsoever. If this system had been suggested 100,75, even 50 years ago, 99% of people of all ideologies would have looked at you like you were insane. We've become insane since the mid to late 60s, LBJ's Great Society and immigration 'reform'.

My granddad immigrated to America at a time when he needed someone to sponsor him and be responsible financially for him if he couldn't find work. He worked two FT jobs. He died not too long ago, and was outraged all the 'entitlements' so-called 'poor' immigrants received. He was even outraged that we allowed uncontrolled immigration of millions and millions of 'poor' people who of course become a huge $ drain [and social] on the U.S.

"Why are we importing so many 'poor' immigrants?"

By on

Why do you assume that "so many" immigrants are poor and go on welfare?

They keep demographic data on MA welfare recipients. That'd be a good thing to look up. Until you do, you should stop assuming.


By on

...they make a cheap exploitable labor force? As long as the govt backstops feeding, housing and medical care employers don't have to pay them next to anything? And of course many of these people are not mosying over to the US but are fleeing unstable situations in their home countries that are frequently the result of US foreign and economic policy (more so for Latin America, than northwest Asia/eastern Europe). Just some ideas.

"poor immigrants"

How many of these "poor immigrants" are actually Puerto Rican - i.e. US Citizens who live in an impoverished area that the US otherwise ignores?

immigrants vs refugees

By on

Although there might not be much of a difference, legally speaking the USG distinguishes between refugees and immigrants. I think the family in question applied for and qualified for refugee status? And they're from a region that the US has had less to directly do with than from where the majority of our immigrants come from.

That damned Herald is just mixing everything up. Kill 'em all and let god sort 'em out! If we could get all these brown people out of here we could go back to the main point -- Irish aren't white people!! (Same thing for the Krauts.)


By on

It's been a 40 year plus conspiracy between big business and finance interests [keep wages down, employers market, bust unions, create more consumers, make $ off of government contracts, subsidies, etc.] and the left [change demographics by importing millions and millions of folks they deem to be more easily manipulated].

Would it be a crazy conspiracy for me to believe those on the left and right, Democrats and Republicans, at the top federal levels at least, are comfortably in bed with each other, and flipping off the general American public? Is it a crazy conspiracy for me to believe both main parties, congressmen, senators, and presidents are brought and paid for by powerful special interest groups?

What's the big deal?

It's the Herald! Two thirds of their readers will be dead in 10 years anyways. Why get upset about a rag whose only purpose it to fire up the mouth breathers so they can sell more papers?

I'd be more concerned about the violent homophobic comments made by Jeff Kuhner on WRKO. How a guy who works on a station in a city with a gay population as large as ours says what he says and writes what he writes and yet he still has a job?

Just a small sample of Kunhner's disgusting invective

The homosexual lobby is on the verge of a historic victory. The potential consequences will be calamitous for democracy and the family. It will usher in a brave new world marked by cultural decadence and judicial tyranny. Traditional America will be smashed — probably forever.

And yet that Ellen is just as cute as a bug on a rug!

It's easy to ignore it when

By on

It's easy to ignore it when it's published in the Herald--even the dead-tree copies in newsstands just make me roll my eyes and think the same thing you've just said. It's less easy to ignore it when the same story draws the anonymous trolls out of hiding on normally-reasonable places like UHub.

I'm still convinced that somewhere, someone has a payroll of folks whose job it is to troll every news site in the country, typing barely-intelligible screeds against those durn libruls every day of the week.

I guess that sounds a little cynical, but it's a good sight less cynical than the other possibility, which is we live amongst a good number of folks who are so afraid of the world that they don't leave their houses, passing their days hurling invective against an enemy that comprises everyone who doesn't think look and act the same way they do.

I didn't realize so many

By on

I didn't realize so many people think it is fine that a terrorist was on welfare. Wow

If only...

By on

If his only crime had been hypocritically taking a few thousand dollars a year from us, we would only be so lucky.

Am I supposed to hate him more because he got welfare?


By on

you are supposed to start foaming at the mouth. It's the secret password! It reinforces every view we have in the bubble!

It's not just that

Did you realize they took the MBTA to get to the bombing site? And who pays for that?


And then they used a road for their getaway, which again is paid for by... THE TAXPAYER.

It's a conspiracy, I tells ya

Being on a terrorism

By on

Being on a terrorism watchlist should not preclude anyone from receiving Mass. benefits.

My son was on the "no fly" list

He was 10 when first stopped.

I tried for over a year to use the official methods to get him taken off to no avail. Then I started copying Ed Markey's office on all correspondence.

It took another week.

I don't trust these "lists" to mean anything after both that lovely experience, and the DHS refusing to follow through on the Congressional mandate to maintain a removal process.

smart people, dumb comments

Our politics has shown itself inadequate in processing this challenge.

The only way we can get politicians to speak in an intelligent way about this is for people to refuse easy answers, rah-rah, the red pen markup, dense citation demands and other point-scoring.

I see lots of smart people here desperate to avoid the whole picture.

The whole picture being ...


So much easier to simplify it by yelling "moooslem welfare cheats! stealing from Americans!" than it is to admit they were American (and pretty much ultimately Caucasian), admit the younger brother (by accounts of those who knew him) had been an epic nice hard working dudebro, to admit that security theater isn't as effective as we are told to believe, to admit anybody up to such serious no good attracted so little attention ...

To admit that we can't reduce this to stereotypes is to admit that we can't predict who is going to turn insanely radical by constructing a profile - other than young, male, and idealistic, perhaps ... which narrows it down to about 20% of the college students in the area.

Stereotype much?

By on

"moooslem"? That's the best you can come up with to defend your argument? I don't like any welfare cheats, regardless of who they are. I don't the fake capitalist on Wall St. who got bailed out anymore than any 'progressive'. And I don't obsess over "moooslems", nor do I pronounce "Muslim" incorrectly. Why are 'progressives' so obsessed with ethnicity, race, gender,sexual orientation? Why? Projection? Neurotic Calvinist Unitarianism? A pernicious malcontents psychological need to be contrary, and the need to feel morally/ethically/intellectually superior?

What's the state trying to hide? We all know what they're trying to hide.