Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Republicans in Congress finally have their priorities straight   (news.yahoo.com ) divider line
    More: Hero, Republican Block, First Lady Michelle Obama, school meal, priority date, Steny Hoyer, background checks, nutrition bill  
•       •       •

10013 clicks; posted to Politics » on 01 Dec 2010 at 9:28 PM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



461 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2010-12-01 10:48:46 PM  

T-Luv: Fatslave: Good. More incentive for poor people and minorities to not have children.

Poor people have children so they can take advantage of school lunches? They got out of their way to buy clothes and toys and everything that goes with raising a kid so they can take advantage of that free school lunch. These poor people are super scammers aren't they?


sheeit, if you can't afford to pack a cheese sandwich and an apple for your kid's lunch you shouldn't be buying him toys either.
 
2010-12-01 10:49:24 PM  

T-Luv: Fatslave: Good. More incentive for poor people and minorities to not have children.

Poor people have children so they can take advantage of school lunches?


No. Poor people have children because they aren't very intelligent. I'm hoping having a child or two starve will teach even them and others not to foolishly breed even more children then they can handle.
 
2010-12-01 10:50:01 PM  

skullkrusher: T-Luv: Fatslave: Good. More incentive for poor people and minorities to not have children.

Poor people have children so they can take advantage of school lunches? They got out of their way to buy clothes and toys and everything that goes with raising a kid so they can take advantage of that free school lunch. These poor people are super scammers aren't they?

sheeit, if you can't afford to pack a cheese sandwich and an apple for your kid's lunch you shouldn't be buying him toys either.


I would never feed my kid a cheese apple for lunch. That's messed up, man.
 
2010-12-01 10:50:01 PM  

skullkrusher: T-Luv: Fatslave: Good. More incentive for poor people and minorities to not have children.

Poor people have children so they can take advantage of school lunches? They got out of their way to buy clothes and toys and everything that goes with raising a kid so they can take advantage of that free school lunch. These poor people are super scammers aren't they?

sheeit, if you can't afford to pack a cheese sandwich and an apple for your kid's lunch you shouldn't be buying him toys either.


Don't forget all the mayo and koolaid!
 
2010-12-01 10:50:39 PM  

Fatslave: I'm hoping having a child or two starve will teach even them and others not to foolishly breed even more children then they can handle


I'm a dick... so I know a dick when I see one. You sir are a massive cock
 
2010-12-01 10:50:51 PM  

The Great EZE: T-Luv: Fatslave: Good. More incentive for poor people and minorities to not have children.

Poor people have children so they can take advantage of school lunches? They got out of their way to buy clothes and toys and everything that goes with raising a kid so they can take advantage of that free school lunch. These poor people are super scammers aren't they?

There are no genuinely poor people. Just lazy folks--mostly minorities (don't look at me, fatslave said it first)--who realize that they'll be on easy street if they just make their lives as miserable and impoverished as possible.

THIS IS WHAT REPUBLICANS ACTUALLY BELIEVE.


THIS IS WHAT LIBERALS ACTUALLY BELIEVE ABOUT REPUBLICANS.
 
2010-12-01 10:50:54 PM  

Phil Herup: WhyteRaven74: Most poorly fed children don't have willfully neglectful parents, rather just parents who can't afford proper food.


Actually "proper" food is cheaper.

You just have to do a little "work" to make it.


Welcome to reality.


Damnit Phil. Mark the calendar, this is the one time I agree with you this year.

/farking cave men knew how to eat better than the average modern American
 
2010-12-01 10:51:20 PM  

T-Luv: I would never feed my kid a cheese apple for lunch. That's messed up, man.


caramel apples for all!
 
2010-12-01 10:51:50 PM  

Fatslave: T-Luv: Fatslave: Good. More incentive for poor people and minorities to not have children.

Poor people have children so they can take advantage of school lunches?

No. Poor people have children because they aren't very intelligent. I'm hoping having a child or two starve will teach even them and others not to foolishly breed even more children then they can handle.


Well you submit the premise that they're not very intelligent, then you expect them to understand the consequences of their actions.
 
2010-12-01 10:52:04 PM  
If it were an amendment to only feed illegal immigrant children who attend public school, it would be signed by Monday.
 
2010-12-01 10:52:31 PM  
It's probably better to teach kids to tighten their belts and pick themselves up by the bootstraps at a young age than to have them on welfare their entire life.
 
2010-12-01 10:52:41 PM  

Gwendolyn: Don't forget all the mayo and koolaid!


I prefer a nice, spicy course ground mustard on my cheese sandwiches but to each her own I spose.
KoolAid sucks anyway. Bring back Ecto Cooler!
 
2010-12-01 10:53:10 PM  

BFlyer: And how was this (not) awesome plan to be funded? More tax cuts for the rich? Oh, wait, the current tax rates have been in place for long enough to make them tax policy. The desired change to tax policy is a tax INCREASE. Therefore, the only way to fund this program is to cut another program (food stamps?) or INCREASE TAXES on some portion of the population. Not a good idea right now, libs.Sorry to inject logic into this discussion. I know it upsets you.


the money is already there..this bill is not about providing meals, they are already being provided, but in trying to make that money go to schools providing nutritional meals.
 
2010-12-01 10:53:12 PM  

NINDroog: Guess I'm going to be the bad guy. Sorry, but I don't think it is the school's responsibility to feed children (with the exception of lunch). If these kids are not getting the nutrition they need, then that is a much bigger problem in general. We spent $50 Billion on food stamps last fiscal year, and if parents are not feeding their children, we should be spending money on the department of child services, not school lunches (something we should probably be doing anyways). If parents are negligent to the point of not feeding their children, then a hot lunch at school is not going to fix the kids life.



Would it help to look at this with a different perspective? Feeding a child a meal at school frees up funds for another meal at home, perhaps even something a little more healthier than the dollar menu at McDonald's.

I think the emphasis on this bill is to promote healthier eating and not necessarily to save starving children from the brink of death or negligent parents. Just give them one balanced, decent meal a day...feed their brains and watch them perform better. Take some burden off our poorest neighbors.

/Or give extend the tax breaks to the rich, whatever.
 
2010-12-01 10:53:22 PM  

torquestripe: If it were an amendment to only feed illegal immigrant children who attend public school, it would be signed by Monday.


Only if the illegal immigrants are muslims from kenya AMIRIGHT!?
 
2010-12-01 10:53:44 PM  

Aero28: The Great EZE: T-Luv: Fatslave: Good. More incentive for poor people and minorities to not have children.

Poor people have children so they can take advantage of school lunches? They got out of their way to buy clothes and toys and everything that goes with raising a kid so they can take advantage of that free school lunch. These poor people are super scammers aren't they?

There are no genuinely poor people. Just lazy folks--mostly minorities (don't look at me, fatslave said it first)--who realize that they'll be on easy street if they just make their lives as miserable and impoverished as possible.

THIS IS WHAT REPUBLICANS ACTUALLY BELIEVE.

THIS IS WHAT LIBERALS ACTUALLY BELIEVE ABOUT REPUBLICANS.


Yeah, where could liberals possibly get the idea that Republicans believe that? (new window)
 
2010-12-01 10:53:54 PM  

skullkrusher: Kamala Harris is kinda hot
Only watching Larry O'D waiting for a fellow Crusader's appearance.


You are so busted.... watching MSNBC

Larry O'D was kissing her arse so bad it was pathetic. He nominated her for POTUS in 2016 already. Such a pathetic display of arse-kissing.


I'm watching this guy right now, he is the the TV version and epitome of a condescending partisan FARK Lib.
 
2010-12-01 10:55:11 PM  

rohar: Phil Herup: WhyteRaven74: Most poorly fed children don't have willfully neglectful parents, rather just parents who can't afford proper food.


Actually "proper" food is cheaper.

You just have to do a little "work" to make it.


Welcome to reality.

Damnit Phil. Mark the calendar, this is the one time I agree with you this year.

/farking cave men knew how to eat better than the average modern American


every town needs a Trader Joe's. I just bought fresh made then frozen no preservative vegan pad thai for $1.99. $1.99 for a delicious, nutritious full meal of Thai goodness.
 
2010-12-01 10:55:32 PM  

KwameKilstrawberry: Would it help to look at this with a different perspective? Feeding a child a meal at school frees up funds for another meal at home, perhaps even something a little more healthier than the dollar menu at McDonald's.


Most school systems already provide 2 meals a day to underprivileged children. With the addition of a third, there's no need for the parents to actually feed their children on weekdays.

I'm as forgiving as the next guy, but this doesn't seem a bit much?
 
2010-12-01 10:56:05 PM  
Phil Herup: You just have to do a little "work" to make it.

And if no one will give you a job?
 
2010-12-01 10:56:07 PM  

rohar: this is the one time I agree with you this year.


Sucks to be you.

Still abusing your wife by making her drive in a Volvo?

:P
 
2010-12-01 10:57:06 PM  

Phil Herup: skullkrusher: Kamala Harris is kinda hot
Only watching Larry O'D waiting for a fellow Crusader's appearance.

You are so busted.... watching MSNBC

Larry O'D was kissing her arse so bad it was pathetic. He nominated her for POTUS in 2016 already. Such a pathetic display of arse-kissing.


I'm watching this guy right now, he is the the TV version and epitome of a condescending partisan FARK Lib.


hehe not embarrassed watching MSNBC. Ashamed to be watching a cockknocker like LO'D
 
2010-12-01 10:57:18 PM  

godofusa.com: T-Luv: godofusa.com: How about these deadbeat sows start feeding their crotch fruit?

What they need to do is stop being poor. That would solve a lot of our problems right there.

How many poor are actually poor? We have too many deadbeats scamming the system. We'd be better off eliminating all child tax credits and giving them a $5000 check to get sterilized.


Nice. I have been working quite successfully for the past 21 years. I lost my job last summer and haven't been able to find another one. Thanks to a serious medical issue with my wife, my savings has been depleted. When my savings runs out, I'll probably lose my house.

I'm hardly what most folks will call a "deadbeat". I'm pretty sure that my kids are better off with me, and that I haven't done anything that deserves prison. However, I'm 50 years old and trying to find a job with a close to 10% unemployment rate.

It's easy to call anyone who's poor a "deadbeat", but I'm pretty sure MANY people are in the same boat as me. If it happens to you, you'll be singing a different tune.
 
2010-12-01 10:57:29 PM  

Phil Herup: WhyteRaven74: Most poorly fed children don't have willfully neglectful parents, rather just parents who can't afford proper food.


Actually "proper" food is cheaper.

You just have to do a little "work" to make it.


Welcome to reality.


Speaking as a cannibal I couldn't agree more.
 
2010-12-01 10:58:02 PM  

skullkrusher: rohar: Phil Herup: WhyteRaven74: Most poorly fed children don't have willfully neglectful parents, rather just parents who can't afford proper food.


Actually "proper" food is cheaper.

You just have to do a little "work" to make it.


Welcome to reality.

Damnit Phil. Mark the calendar, this is the one time I agree with you this year.

/farking cave men knew how to eat better than the average modern American

every town needs a Trader Joe's. I just bought fresh made then frozen no preservative vegan pad thai for $1.99. $1.99 for a delicious, nutritious full meal of Thai goodness.


I just packed in close to 300lbs of organic pork for under $2/lb. The guy's name wasn't Joe. Beef happens the same way in the spring but cheeper / lb.

The butcher who does the cutting will take food stamps and pay the rancher cash.
 
2010-12-01 10:58:34 PM  
Piney No, that is not what I was saying. I am saying that this is a redundant program because we already spend billions on food stamps. If lower income children are not being fed via existing programs, than yes, it is neglect. Especially when you consider the average recipient gets about $160 (I low-balled) per person, per month on top of whatever it is they are already paying for food.
If you want them to have more disposable income to spend on other items, like you said, medicine, disposables, etc., then increase the amount a family receives per person via the food stamp program. The reason this issue always gets associated with neglect is precisely because people who receive ample food assistance do not spend their foodstamps on food. Furthermore, since your assertion is that it aids in increasing disposable income you should be agreeing with me, because a school lunch will only aid their income during the school months.
Oh, and then there is the added benefit of not creating another system of bureaucracy to figure out which school requires additional money, etc.
 
2010-12-01 10:58:51 PM  
There is something extremely wrong with not wanting to feed children.

/So vote to starve the neediest of all?
 
2010-12-01 10:59:11 PM  

rohar: Most school systems already provide 2 meals a day to underprivileged children. With the addition of a third, there's no need for the parents to actually feed their children on weekdays.


School food sucks too.


Did you see that Jamie Oliver show on it?

French fries are a "vegetable" according to the licensed dietician in charge of the district.
 
2010-12-01 10:59:13 PM  
Look libs, the people have spoken. Keep your big government out of our public education system.

I'm just kidding. This is moronic and will make good soundbites for Dems in 2012. Way to go, idiots.
 
2010-12-01 10:59:30 PM  

Phil Herup: rohar: this is the one time I agree with you this year.

Sucks to be you.

Still abusing your wife by making her drive in a Volvo?

:P


She's been helping her newly indigent father out at the ranch a lot so she's been driving the dodge. I get the Volvo. I'm not feeling much like a man lately, you may have had a point.
 
2010-12-01 10:59:47 PM  

JSTACAT: WhyteRaven74 [TotalFark] 2010-12-01 10:02:25 PM
Vanetia: Why is that a bad thing? How is requiring background checks delaying legislation? Why would Dems not vote for that?

As far as I know all states already require that. So no reason for federal law to require it."


// You hit the nail on the head.
We don't need more federal control and intervention, the states have got it handled. We have 2 sets of laws that completely overlap, Fed and state. The Feds need only a few laws to do their constitutional duties, not the millions of pages we have now, 1/2 of which were added by 0bama1.
Its ok for fed to give money, but not ok to demand our souls [freedom] in exchange.

Thats the secret commie sauce we are fighting about.
Perhaps 0bama's jump'n jungle jumbo jacks won't be all that delicious to Americans;
once they find out about the secret sauce, and what it really is.


1Citation needed
 
2010-12-01 11:00:41 PM  

CanisNoir: Okay, we have welfare, food stamps, unemployment and a whole host of other aid programs and still we have kids starving unless they get a free meal while in school? Doesn't speak to much towards the effectiveness of those other programs does it. Oh and the amendment the Republicans added - background check for child care workers. OH THOSE EVIL REPUBLICANS WOT HATE OUR CHILDREN!!!!


Which is already a requirement at the state level, therefore making it unnecessary to add it at the federal level. Try again, I'm sure you'll get it eventually.
 
2010-12-01 11:01:29 PM  

Phil Herup: rohar: Most school systems already provide 2 meals a day to underprivileged children. With the addition of a third, there's no need for the parents to actually feed their children on weekdays.

School food sucks too.


Did you see that Jamie Oliver show on it?

French fries are a "vegetable" according to the licensed dietician in charge of the district.


But this bill has standards so that the schools don't give money unless they provide healthy food. It's a bill addressing the exact problem you just mentioned, but you oppose it for what seems to be partisan reasons.
 
2010-12-01 11:02:19 PM  

rohar: skullkrusher: rohar: Phil Herup: WhyteRaven74: Most poorly fed children don't have willfully neglectful parents, rather just parents who can't afford proper food.


Actually "proper" food is cheaper.

You just have to do a little "work" to make it.


Welcome to reality.

Damnit Phil. Mark the calendar, this is the one time I agree with you this year.

/farking cave men knew how to eat better than the average modern American

every town needs a Trader Joe's. I just bought fresh made then frozen no preservative vegan pad thai for $1.99. $1.99 for a delicious, nutritious full meal of Thai goodness.

I just packed in close to 300lbs of organic pork for under $2/lb. The guy's name wasn't Joe. Beef happens the same way in the spring but cheeper / lb.

The butcher who does the cutting will take food stamps and pay the rancher cash.


city, country, doesn't matter. Good food can be had for a fraction of what the processed shiat costs. Takes a bit more effort but not all that much once you know what you're looking for. But you still need to buy Kraft Mac and Cheese though cuz that shiat is goooooooooooood
 
2010-12-01 11:02:43 PM  

skullkrusher: every town needs a Trader Joe's.



We do all of our shopping at Trader Joe's, COSTCO and Whole Foods


Supermarkets are for idiots and emergencies.

/just picked up a VitaMix... sweet
 
2010-12-01 11:03:17 PM  

Teufelaffe: CanisNoir: Okay, we have welfare, food stamps, unemployment and a whole host of other aid programs and still we have kids starving unless they get a free meal while in school? Doesn't speak to much towards the effectiveness of those other programs does it. Oh and the amendment the Republicans added - background check for child care workers. OH THOSE EVIL REPUBLICANS WOT HATE OUR CHILDREN!!!!

Which is already a requirement at the state level, therefore making it unnecessary to add it at the federal level. Try again, I'm sure you'll get it eventually.


And, if you RTFA, you'll see that the addition of the unrelated amendment is a stalling tactic, because it'll force the bill to go back for yet another vote, even though it passed in one house already. It's all a game.
 
2010-12-01 11:03:24 PM  

Teufelaffe: Which is already a requirement at the state level, therefore making it unnecessary to add it at the federal level.


every state?
 
2010-12-01 11:03:28 PM  
Subsidies for restaurants?
 
2010-12-01 11:04:22 PM  

WorldCitizen: johnsoninca: Did anyone else think Michelle was hugging a KKK member?

Yes. First thing I thought of when I saw it.


Glad I'm not the only one.
 
2010-12-01 11:04:51 PM  

Phil Herup: skullkrusher: every town needs a Trader Joe's.


We do all of our shopping at Trader Joe's, COSTCO and Whole Foods


Supermarkets are for idiots and emergencies.

/just picked up a VitaMix... sweet


we don't have any of the club stores yet though I hear one is opening somewhere I don't want to go though I forget where it is. Trader Joe's is the bizzomb. Whole Foods is for hippies
 
2010-12-01 11:05:49 PM  
Personally, I love the stupidity (or hypocrisy) used by folks who can simultaneously state that "poor people aren't really poor", but that $250K per year isn't actually rich.
 
2010-12-01 11:06:28 PM  

rohar: KwameKilstrawberry: Would it help to look at this with a different perspective? Feeding a child a meal at school frees up funds for another meal at home, perhaps even something a little more healthier than the dollar menu at McDonald's.

Most school systems already provide 2 meals a day to underprivileged children. With the addition of a third, there's no need for the parents to actually feed their children on weekdays.

I'm as forgiving as the next guy, but this doesn't seem a bit much?


Do you have kids? Because when my kids were in school 5 years ago, there was a free lunch program. One meal, not two, and not three.

I would guess that some schools, in the needier parts of the country, have additional funds for additional meals for qualified applicants, but without [citation needed], I have a hard time believing that most schools already provide two meals a day.
 
2010-12-01 11:06:56 PM  

NINDroog: Piney No, that is not what I was saying. I am saying that this is a redundant program because we already spend billions on food stamps. If lower income children are not being fed via existing programs, than yes, it is neglect. Especially when you consider the average recipient gets about $160 (I low-balled) per person, per month on top of whatever it is they are already paying for food.
If you want them to have more disposable income to spend on other items, like you said, medicine, disposables, etc., then increase the amount a family receives per person via the food stamp program. The reason this issue always gets associated with neglect is precisely because people who receive ample food assistance do not spend their foodstamps on food. Furthermore, since your assertion is that it aids in increasing disposable income you should be agreeing with me, because a school lunch will only aid their income during the school months.
Oh, and then there is the added benefit of not creating another system of bureaucracy to figure out which school requires additional money, etc.


but I don't agree with what you are saying. This isn't about neglectful parents not feeding their kids or not even being able to, it is simply adding more (which probably includes more schools) and directing those funds to schools that provide healthier meals.

This seems to me more of a way to improve this program. Instead of just writing a blank check to schools they require a certain level of nutrition from those meals.

This isn't a question of canceling this program. The program will still exist even if this bill gets defeated. It will just cover less kids and allow schools to wrap anything they want to serve into it.

The idea that somehow this program emboldens neglectful parents seems a little retarded to me. Somehow everyone on food stamps are gaming the system?
 
2010-12-01 11:07:28 PM  
rohar 2010-12-01 10:55:32 PM
KwameKilstrawberry: Would it help to look at this with a different perspective? Feeding a child a meal at school frees up funds for another meal at home, perhaps even something a little more healthier than the dollar menu at McDonald's.

Most school systems already provide 2 meals a day to underprivileged children. With the addition of a third, there's no need for the parents to actually feed their children on weekdays.

I'm as forgiving as the next guy, but this doesn't seem a bit much?"

// It is too much, the secret flaw is that parents will not buy their kids any food and make the kids survive off school food.'
soon enough, there is a dependency on that, low IQ parents spend their little food windfall on beer etc.

The secret commie sauce is that shift to the fark'n -feds- standing in for what used to be a personal/family responsibility.
The more they can create these dependencies, the more firmly America is addicted to communism.

That's how the mental virus of communism spreads and entrenches itself, y'see.
 
2010-12-01 11:07:50 PM  
GOP: "We will kill your children until you give us tax cuts for the wealthy."

Sadly, does anyone suppose this epiphany will reach even a small number of moronic Republican voters? My own father will find some excuse to still vote GOP. Michael Steele could kick his door in and rape him in his sleep, and he wouldn't break out of it.
 
2010-12-01 11:08:05 PM  

bujin: Personally, I love the stupidity (or hypocrisy) used by folks who can simultaneously state that "poor people aren't really poor", but that $250K per year isn't actually rich.


I think it's due to the fact that the income range for the middle class is about $12.50 wide
 
2010-12-01 11:09:31 PM  
The Great EZE:Yeah, where could liberals possibly get the idea that Republicans believe that? (new window)

Try again.
 
2010-12-01 11:09:32 PM  

brainiac-dumdum: bullschnit like this only perpetuate the poverty cycle. if our nation got its schnit straight, programs like this would be far less expensive.

it's an excellent example of the current belief that values ideological purity over utilitarianism.


Exactly, and more effort should be spent arguing this and similar liberal legislative agendas in terms of measurable societal gains and rational self-interest. Americans may have 15 minute attention spans, but presenting these things as paying out in the long-term is still a better sell than 'think of the poor people's children' or arguments from compassion or morality. A lot of stolidly middle-class Democratic voters don't actually much like the poor either after all.
 
2010-12-01 11:10:00 PM  

Phil Herup: rohar: Most school systems already provide 2 meals a day to underprivileged children. With the addition of a third, there's no need for the parents to actually feed their children on weekdays.

School food sucks too.


Did you see that Jamie Oliver show on it?

French fries are a "vegetable" according to the licensed dietician in charge of the district.


You know I live like 5 miles from Idaho right? I'm probably part of some damned orginization that actually

Phil Herup: skullkrusher: every town needs a Trader Joe's.


We do all of our shopping at Trader Joe's, COSTCO and Whole Foods


Supermarkets are for idiots and emergencies.

/just picked up a VitaMix... sweet


Just when I was starting to think there was hope for Phil. Damn.

Thanks for helping a company I own stock in though!

/never drive the volvo there
//it seems out of place
 
2010-12-01 11:10:31 PM  

skullkrusher: Good food can be had for a fraction of what the processed shiat costs. Takes a bit more effort but not all that much once you know what you're looking for.



THIS!


skullkrusher: But you still need to buy Kraft Mac and Cheese though cuz that shiat is goooooooooooood



My fiance made beefaroni last night... it was some gourmet shiat. Organic beef with low-carb pasta and grated parmesan. She puts finely shredded carrots in it... it takes the "bite" out of the tomatoes. Unreal.
 
Displayed 50 of 461 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report