Cloward and Piven's book is the defacto standard for all would-be c*******ts/socialists. It is a very anti-social book that spells out in very clear terms how to bring down a government system. In fact, it is the playbook that many (but not all) liberals use in dealing with the government, and people who do not agree with their world view. It is in fact being used against the United States today. So, that you would quote from Cloward very definitely explains something about you.

Now, as for your post, some of what you say is true. The Republican party is definitely out of touch with most of America. I think the same is true of the Democratic party as well, but they are much better at spinning issues. Sadly, I don't think that your argument is correct. I think the real problem is that there are more people in America who want handouts from the government than those who don't. I think that's the real reason the Republicans lost. This is the end result of decades of liberal agenda being made manifest. It all started with the Progressive era, and really took root during FDR's administration. The moment you give people handouts, they acquire a taste for them like a drug, and they want more. Do it long enough and they become addicted. Once they become addicted, they become your s***e. S***ery is the only end result of a welfare system. It deprives people of their dignity, and the self respect to make more out of themselves. It is for that reason that many people who are in the system make no effort to live outside the system. Ironically, there are other laws in place that only serve to reinforce this attitude. Many people will actually lose the benefits they have if they have an income greater than a certain amount (amounts vary by state). This is the essence of what a taker is. They are the disenfranchised poor who see welfare as an entitlement that they have earned. They don't see it for the bondage that it is.

I welcome a good debate. I believe that the only way for a person to grow is to test their ideas and opinions with classical debate. Only by poking holes in their logic can they discover flaws in thinking and grow from the experience. True debate does not use fallacy to correct fallacious reasoning, nor does it include personal attacks. Keep it clean, and I'll consider your opinions and ideas seriously.