Welfare

http://thinkprogress.org/tag/welfare/

Romney campaign chair John Sununu

Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign has flooded the airwaves with advertisements criticizing the Obama administration’s changes to the 1996 welfare reform law, accusing the administration of “gutting welfare reform” and removing the work requirements the law mandates. The ads are blatantly false, a point noted by independent fact-checkers, multiple media outlets, and even the newspaper cited in one of the ads.

This afternoon on CNN, Situation Room host Wolf Blitzer took Romney campaign chairman John Sununu to task over the false ads, reading directly from the Dept. of Health and Human Services directive that outlines the waiver program and the letters from Republican governors who asked for the waivers:

BLITZER: I’ll read to you, governor, the precise language from the Health and Human Services memo outlining what the states who seek this flexibility, and you were once a governor, and I’ll read to you what it says. It says the Department of Health and Human Services will only consider approving waivers relating to the work participation requirements that make changes intended to lead to more effective means of meeting the work of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. The secretary will not approve a waiver for an initiative that substantially likely to reduce access for assistance or employment for needy families.

SUNUNU: That’s correct.

but the old liar continues on after admitting he was wrong, or did he even realize he did just that? or was he following republican doctrine "when that deer in the headlights moment comes, over talk, talk loud, blame the other, do the crap eating grin then that inane incipient laugh and continue on with the lie.

BLITZER: They’re not going to approve anything unless it leads to greater opportunities for moving people from welfare to work.

SUNUNU: Look, to quote the president who signed the bill, it depends on what your definition of access is and expands is and background discussions were. The background discussions talked about broadening it to the point where you soften the hard reality of the work requirement. [...]

depends on what your definition is.... hmmmmmm sounds to me like if there were 500 people there then potentially 500 opinions but none factual, and any one would be subject to denial and then you have "499 opinions on the wall".