And the slippery slope strawman reveals itself...
This bill is proposing MORE students for not just the breakfast and lunch programs but also dinner AND throughout the summer. Good lord...Lets just seize them...house them...feed them...clothe them...
oh...wait...thats precisely what we are doing...sans the 'seize' part.
When does it end? And how do we CONTINUE to sustain these endless social programs? Who pays for it? Wait...I have an idea...lets start there...All the people that believe this is a good idea...YOU pay for it. Voluntarily...out of your pocket...because its what you believe is the right thing to do.
No, what the school can provide, likely healthy food. How terrible. But you can feed them whatever you want.
If I want to follow the Bible and help my fellow man, I will do so.... of my own volition. I do NOT need the federal government to be the middleman, or force me to help my fellow man.
Moderator's Warning: |
So you'd say that for everyone eh? Thanks but no thanks I'll make my own decisions with what to do with MY money. Since when does this idea that Person A is entitled to what Person B earns, and can tell him what to do with it a correct one?
j-mac
those on food stamps already qualifiy for free lunches. why expand the program to include yet more people?
I don't have any children but if I did, I'd make sure that they have FOOD, A GOOD ROOF OVER THEIR HEADS AND MY LOVE. I don't need the government to provide anything for my kids because I wouldn't consider myself a man. Why?? because I was raised to be this way and I always back up my talk.
While it's true that in most cases food stamp recipients do qualify for free lunches in public school, S.3307 would also expand entitlement to all foster children - you know, those children who have been abandoned or orphanned. You gonna let them starve, too? Surely, you're not that heartless?
And you are well and truly blessed that no catastrophic illness or accident has ever befallen you. That's not on you sunshine. That's on the universe. Not all are so blessed.
Oh, surely they are.
Yes...we are evil...and heartless...
If there really were a "liberal mainstream media," the fact that the GOP does this sort of thing all the time would me more prevalent in the narrative.
And what is wrong with background checks for child care workers? This is what the issue is really about, not about the GOP being ruthless baby killers. Do Democrats support pedophiles? Just asking. :mrgreen:
Agreed, but added to the complaints they raised, wouldn't tehy still have those complaints even if democrats accepted the addition? Wouldn't it still be bigger government?
i'm willing to bet that 300 dollars in foodstamps went a bit further then than it does now...
Growing up, my mom and dad divorced, he didn't pay child support and my mom was struggling to make ends meet. Discounted lunches and sometimes free meals helped out greatly. Shame on some of you for making this bill sound evil.
When the ones that think this is socialist or unconstitutional or some other horse **** like Moses brought the constitution and US laws down from Mt. Sinai, take a moment and do this for me:
Think about why you disagree with having a bill that helps pay for school lunches and then say out loud, "I think this bill is socialist and bad for kids." If WHILE you are saying this it sounds like you are trying to get the taste of **** out of your mouth then you probably are an asshole.
So, this justifies the GOP to once again be the "Party of NO" when just after the midterms and more recently as Monday of this week (11/29/10) they claimed to work towards bipartisanship? I call BS!
If the bill was fine w/o the amendment, it should have been fine in it's original form "AS-IS" to send to the President for signature.
Dude. Many, MANY posts ago, Oscar and a few other people said that kids SHOULD go without, if their parents cannot provide for them. I don't give a damn about the OP. I, where you quote me, am reacting to those posts.
What has this bill got to do with your income? Fnding for S.3307 would come from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) under the stimulus bill. It's not like a new tax will be initiated to pay for it. Of course, you'll say the stimulus is wasted, big government spending. Still, it's not a direct assault on your earned income. So, as I've said to others who would rather repeat the same stall rhetoric and talking points, pick up the needle on that old 45 and move it to a new position. Your "get your hands outta my pockets" banter is getting old.
Yes...we are evil...and heartless...what could we be thinking...of COURSE it is the SCHOOLS job to feed 20+ million 'children' breajkfast, lunch, and dinner; and its the federal governments job to create 17 new departments and create grant programs with no definition of purpose or intent; its the federal governments job to takle care of every poor crippled and dependent pet that they have created. Of course...that they create them...manipulate them...use them for political power...keep them dependent...thats MUCH more caring. That the government already provides funding for those families to feed their children...no worries. That they provide money to take care of foster children (all of which are now included in the full meal deal program)...immaterial. That the federal government creates endless social programs and continue to dig us deeper in debt...that doesnt matter...and certainly not to people that wont be responsbile for paying off that debt...
Evil I tell you...heartless.
The irony...there is a reason this evil, heartless conservative bastard has just had to get dressed and is about to leave my home in the dead of night...
notice how it is the CHILDREN'S fault that they are in need of sustenance... its the federal governments job to takle care of every poor crippled and dependent pet that they have created. ...
yes, thatEvil I tell you...heartless.
Yay. I'm so glad we're so serious about cutting the debt and deficit with such great things like a federal employee wage freeze and trying to raise the taxes of the top 2%.
Wait? What's that you say? While simultaneously doing things to "save" money they're also pushing for billions and billions of additional spending?
My god, who EVER could've predicted that :roll:
ARE YOU DEAF? They said nothing gets through except the tax extension.
here is the republican 'starve the beast' policy, incarnate
we can either give tax breaks to billionaire$ or we can instead use that otherwise available revenue to provide nourishment to CHILDREN
and the reich wing - aka the republican party - makes its choice
starve the children so that billionaire$ do not have to pay a reasonable tax rate
notice further that this post reveals - however snarkily presented - how that element of the political spectrum reveals the victims - the CHILDREN - to actually be the perpetrators:
notice how it is the CHILDREN'S fault that they are in need of sustenance
and the forum member would have us believe that these CHILDREN, being responsible for their plight, are not deserving of a government solution to their hunger problem
yes, that
and
disgusting, actually
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?