How dare they cite statistics??!! The dirty bastards are trying to confuse the issue with numbers, percentages, the costs of basic necessities which are really, really optional. How much toilet paper is really wasted? Big savings could be had there, which should count as an increase in income. And isn't even considered by those statistical, number-crunching bleeding heart advocates of a feeding frenzy at the public trough.

Now, I've seen some housing that some poor people live in (I assume they're poor) which could not be owned, subsidized or loaned to people by a governmental agency. At least to anything with two legs. Maybe they are saving, investing their subsidizies in hedge funds, or the money market.

What we need is not scurrilous statistics, but warm, fuzzy welfare Cadillac anecdotes. Millions of little stories about how Uncle Sugar is paying for waste, thievery, cheating, the undeserving. No, not Congress, but poor people.

And, realistically. Seriously. Cross my heart. I can't help but think that if there were any money in poverty, anywhere, Halliburton would be into the public pocket up to it's armpit.

And it's not. To my knowledge.

Time to close. I'm having too much fun with this. Bad for me. Gotta head out and berate a bum for cheating me out of my HDTV, and I'm not going to use statistics. I'm gonna tell him about the guy who bought pre-chopped lettuce with food stamps.

:-)

Arf