Look, we can't be helping the poor and hungry. This is a Christian nation, after all.

Aarontology: Look, we can't be helping the poor and hungry. This is a Christian nation, after all.

WWJD? Cut taxes, that's what he'd do.

Hmmmm......

Hmmmm......

*scratches head*

Now, that is a lot of hungry kids getting fed....

Hmmmm......

But that's an awful lot of job creators getting a desperately needed tax cut which they will no doubt pour 100% into job creation.

Hmmmm......

I'm going to have to ponder this a bit more.

Holy f*ck.

I thought the headline was some sort of exaggeration or hypothetical, but I clicked the article and sweet f*cking Christ, there it is.

And instead of hiring cafeteria workers, why don't we let these schoolchildren purchase, prepare and serve these nutritious meals as a sort of "job-training" program?

choo: And instead of hiring cafeteria workers, why don't we let these schoolchildren purchase, prepare and serve these nutritious meals as a sort of "job-training" program?

As long as they clean up after themselves and learn valuable janitorial skills, then I'm all for it.

Guys, I think you're missing a very important factor in all of this: some of those children are not white.

what_now: Guys, I think you're missing a very important factor in all of this: some of those children are not white.

Sadly, you are probably correct. I think most Republicans, when told of these cuts to these children do not picture them as white kids.

Will be shoved aside as hyper-partisan finger-pointing and cherry-picking, or something. It'll at least have a hyphen in it.

what_now: Guys, I think you're missing a very important factor in all of this: some of those children are not white.

Pay attention, children, this is how you shame people into compliance: accuse them of racism.

what_now: Guys, I think you're missing a very important factor in all of this: some of those children are not white.


"Those boys is not white! Those boys is not white! Hell, they ain't even that poor! They've got refrigerators!"

cman: what_now: Guys, I think you're missing a very important factor in all of this: some of those children are not white.

Pay attention, children, this is how you shame people into compliance: accuse them of racism.

Well, they're completely unfazed when you point out their utter lack of compassion and humanity

/might as well go for a sensitive spot

kmmontandon: cman: what_now: Guys, I think you're missing a very important factor in all of this: some of those children are not white.

Pay attention, children, this is how you shame people into compliance: accuse them of racism.

That's complete bullshiat.

After all, Republicans aren't capable of shame.

You also spew bullshiat. This country is not just Dems v Repubs. There are many others out there that do not subscribe to the two party system.

cman: what_now: Guys, I think you're missing a very important factor in all of this: some of those children are not white.

Pay attention, children, this is how you shame people into compliance: accuse them of racism.

Sorry cman, but you are wrong. At least inasmuch as how Republican voters are being portrayed by that statement. Since the Reagan era at least, the dog whistle politics of "welfare queens" have been played over and over by the Republican party. They have excelled at getting their voters to see people on the dole as lazy minorities. I bet to the Republican voter, that is the first thing that comes to mind when someone mentions welfare.

Ironically, it is mostly red states, those that are strongly Republican that are the biggest sucklers of the government teat, taking in far more Federal money than they give in taxes. The poor and undereducated in those states have been trained by the GOP pols to think of the lazy immigrants and minorities as the ones getting handouts. They then stretch their own necks out in front of these politicians while handing them a razor blade.

And when their own benefits are cut and they start to struggle even more, they will be told to blame the Democrats. And they will.

Slaxl
It's just not funny anymore. Why does the GOP have a loyal following of poor people who think the millionaires need tax breaks while their children starve? Why does this happen?

Because boot strappy boot strappin' boot strappiness. Many poor people have internalized it, and truly believe that, any day now, they won't be poor anymore, as long as they keep tugging on those boot straps.

You also spew bullshiat. This country is not just Dems v Repubs. There are many others out there that do not subscribe to the two party system.

They are called "people that won't admit to being Republican"

See America, shiat like this is why the EU and most other industrialized nations make fun of us all the time. They don't feel a urgent need to listen to lectures from a country that has a hard time deciding between feeding low-income school children and shielding millionaires' estates from paying taxes.

Give the millionaires the tax break. Then they'll create a bunch of jobs, and all the hungry kids' parents will get awesome jobs and be able to feed their kids.

There aren't any hungry children in America. They have rice and beans, don't they?

They have refrigerators, don't they?

GAT_00: These people are goddamn tyrants.

That's really not the right word. These people are duly elected, now THAT is the scary part. People vote for them. People SUPPORT this kind of thing.

alaric3: I suggest compromise:
Can't we feed 280,000 hungry children to 3340 Millionaires?

A modest proposal.

Everyone is so quick to make the judgment but perhaps I should be the judge of this issue as I am the person who so much enjoys being the judge of things because I have watched many episodes of Judy the Judging Lady and have learned about how to do the judging. For this purpose I see two sides to this issue. One side of this says that the children should be treated with the respect and the dignity. The other side of this says the rich people should be treated with the respect and the dignity.

The first side of this issue is that the children should be treated with the respect and the dignity upon which we would give to a kitten. This side of the issue says that the special snowflakes must all receive the food even though there is the crisis of which I am speaking of obesity in the country of this. We should give them the food and also the shelter so that these kids do not grow up to kill the rich people out of the spite of themselves. Those would would subscribe to this issue include Jesus of the Christian Faith and Jerry Sandusky.

The other side of this issue says look no one is going to buy a car with fed children. And fed children do not get you to go on the vacation where you create the jobs for the Dominicans at your island retreat. And also no children are going to help to make more money for Mitchell Romney and Annabelle Romney because children are not those who pay taxes unless they go to the working camps. So fark the children.

Now I am not sure which side of this issue would be the side of which I would rule as I have not yet seen the pudginess of the children who are complaining of not having the free lunch of which there is no such thing of. Because look if you give the free lunch to the children then someone might not get the side of caviar with the polar bear steak.

vernonFL: There aren't any hungry children in America. They have rice and beans, don't they?

They have refrigerators, don't they?

I've heard they don't even have to pay any taxes.

You have to respect the gleefully, unapologetic evil of the Republican party. Governor Scott's latest thing was cutting funding for battered women's shelters. It's like tying a girl to the railroad tracks at this point, it's hilarious

Mugato: You have to respect the gleefully, unapologetic evil of the Republican party. Governor Scott's latest thing was cutting funding for battered women's shelters. It's like tying a girl to the railroad tracks at this point, it's hilarious

They do all this shiat then claim there's no war on women

Any woman who votes GOP is an utter moran

Quasar: vernonFL: There aren't any hungry children in America. They have rice and beans, don't they?

They have refrigerators, don't they?

I've heard they don't even have to pay any taxes.

Really? Those lucky duckies.

vernonFL: alaric3: I suggest compromise:
Can't we feed 280,000 hungry children to 3340 Millionaires?

A modest proposal.

Your response was swift enough.

nekom: Aarontology: Look, we can't be helping the poor and hungry. This is a Christian nation, after all.

WWJD? Cut taxes, that's what he'd do.

Little known fact.

Jesus only healed the sick of the Centurions paid less in taxes.

AdolfOliverPanties: what_now: Guys, I think you're missing a very important factor in all of this: some of those children are not white.

Sadly, you are probably correct. I think most Republicans, when told of these cuts to these children do not picture them as white kids.

Slaxl: It's just not funny anymore. Why does the GOP have a loyal following of poor people who think the millionaires need tax breaks while their children starve? Why does this happen?

"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires."
― John Steinbeck

BillCo: strathcona: BillCo: Here is a better article on the subject.

Frontpage? Are you farking shiatting me?

Sorry, I forgot how much liberals hate facts.

Isn't it a fact that Apple is worth more than many countries and Coca Cola is splitting its stock?

BillCo: strathcona: BillCo: Here is a better article on the subject.

Frontpage? Are you farking shiatting me?

Sorry, I forgot how much liberals hate facts.

Cutting taxes for the rich will lead to more prosperity which will lead to well more than 280,000 children who were hungry, no longer being hungry anymore. So, cutting taxes for the rich will actually help out more children.

so awful.