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.

(Fox News)   It looks like free lunch programs, which provide free meals to poor children through schools, may be feeding a few children who might not technically qualify. Of course, this means the program is a communist failure and must be stopped   (foxnews.com) divider line 273
    More: Stupid, San Juan Unified School District, meals  
•       •       •

2398 clicks; posted to Politics » on 05 Jul 2012 at 6:10 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



273 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-05 02:04:28 PM  
Only Faux Noose would require smelling salts in the case of schoolchildren *gasp* eating somewhat balanced food.
 
2012-07-05 02:05:04 PM  
Denying children a meal is exactly what Christ would do.
 
2012-07-05 02:15:28 PM  
Kids who can afford a meal would turn their noses up at a sandwich, fruit, and milk and go get themselves one of those horrid Dorito things from Taco Bell and a giant Mountain Dew.
 
2012-07-05 02:16:47 PM  
I think the difference between conservatives and liberals really just boils down to a preference for avoiding type I errors vs. type II errors.

LIberals believe that feeding hungry children is important enough that we accept that a few people will game the system and get school meals that their children don't qualify for. Conservatives are willing to accept that a lot of children go hungry in order to make sure no one gets something they don't deserve.
 
2012-07-05 02:16:55 PM  
Maybe if you morons would look at the greater picture, you would understand why Republicans oppose balanced eating. Because, as conservative scientific studies have shown, fat particles block the electromagnetic indoctrination beams used by liberals in order to subvert our way of life. This is how come people in the South are fatter on average than those in the North. Southerners realize what Taxbongo is trying to do. So, in order to protect themselves, they eat "poorly". But in reality, they are eating smarter and healthier than any stupid lib. Prove me wrong.
 
2012-07-05 02:20:58 PM  
They were doing this when my son was a young child (he's in his early 30s now). Granted there will be some children from families than can afford to feed them, but overall there are many more children for whom this represents the only nutritious meal they'll get that day. For some children it's the only meal they'll get.

I used to volunteer for the summer lunch program when my son was younger and there were two skinny little boys that gobbled down their lunches as fast as they could so they could get back in line with the hopes of getting a second lunch (sometimes we had extra lunches). Their mother was raising the children by herself and working a minimum wage job that barely paid the rent and bills.
 
2012-07-05 02:22:30 PM  

Aarontology: Denying children a meal is exactly what Christ would do.


Thread. Over.
 
2012-07-05 02:23:25 PM  

VictoryCabal: I think the difference between conservatives and liberals really just boils down to a preference for avoiding type I errors vs. type II errors.

LIberals believe that feeding hungry children is important enough that we accept that a few people will game the system and get school meals that their children don't qualify for. Conservatives are willing to accept that a lot of children go hungry in order to make sure no one gets something they don't deserve.


That's an interesting way of putting it. Hadn't thought of it that way before. It really just defines how much of an asshole conservatives are about error though. Both error types are inevitable though. Type I can be rooted out without denying people who need it, which is why approaching it that way is better.
 
2012-07-05 02:37:22 PM  
I'm ok with paying higher taxes so poor children can eat food, even if that means that some of that food goes to children who are just lower middle class.

/socialist.
 
2012-07-05 02:44:05 PM  

VictoryCabal: I think the difference between conservatives and liberals really just boils down to a preference for avoiding type I errors vs. type II errors.

LIberals believe that feeding hungry children is important enough that we accept that a few people will game the system and get school meals that their children don't qualify for. Conservatives are willing to accept that a lot of children go hungry in order to make sure no one gets something they don't deserve.


Can I steal this from you? You just expressed what a lot of us on here have been saying for ages but much better than I have ever seen it put forward.
 
2012-07-05 02:46:03 PM  
"If someone is coming from a family that makes a quarter-of-a-million dollars a year, and they're not checking eligibility when they're coming in the door, I think most people would wonder, 'Am I paying for this?'"

Does anyone REALLY believe this happens? People with any sort of discretionary income go to restaurants, not what amounts to be a soup kitchen.

"Hey Bob, you wanna grab a quick burger?"

"Sure! But hey, we could just go to the ghetto and get a free sandwich."

"BRILLIANT. I'll drive."

/is there anything you sissies won't get your panties twisted over?
 
2012-07-05 02:46:59 PM  

VictoryCabal: I think the difference between conservatives and liberals really just boils down to a preference for avoiding type I errors vs. type II errors.

LIberals believe that feeding hungry children is important enough that we accept that a few people will game the system and get school meals that their children don't qualify for. Conservatives are willing to accept that a lot of children go hungry in order to make sure no one gets something they don't deserve.


This is in my profile now so I'll always have it near me.
 
2012-07-05 02:50:19 PM  
If their parents hate them so much to make them eat school lunches, this is the least of the crimes they're liable for.
 
2012-07-05 02:51:00 PM  

ginandbacon: Can I steal this from you? You just expressed what a lot of us on here have been saying for ages but much better than I have ever seen it put forward.


Sure, no prob.
 
2012-07-05 02:56:52 PM  

VictoryCabal: ginandbacon: Can I steal this from you? You just expressed what a lot of us on here have been saying for ages but much better than I have ever seen it put forward.

Sure, no prob.


Thank you and thank for your eloquence.
 
2012-07-05 03:05:03 PM  

VictoryCabal: I think the difference between conservatives and liberals really just boils down to a preference for avoiding type I errors vs. type II errors.

LIberals believe that feeding hungry children is important enough that we accept that a few people will game the system and get school meals that their children don't qualify for. Conservatives are willing to accept that a lot of children go hungry in order to make sure no one gets something they don't deserve.


But when $8,000,000,000 in cash went missing in Iraq:

wtfhub.com
 
2012-07-05 03:13:46 PM  

GAT_00: That's an interesting way of putting it. Hadn't thought of it that way before. It really just defines how much of an asshole conservatives are about error though. Both error types are inevitable though. Type I can be rooted out without denying people who need it, which is why approaching it that way is better.


I remember an incident from school, probably seventh or eighth grade. I don't remember why, or the exact details of the event, but the class was discussing news reports from some disaster relief efforts. Among them were reports of distributing tents, tarps, and other temporary shelter supplies, and there was some low level of fraud in that some people whose homes weren't destroyed picking up supplies because hey, free tent!

Part of the class was of the "gee, those guys are assholes, and that really sucks, but there are a lot of people homeless and it's important to try to help them as fast as possible" school of thought. I was among those people. We felt that the best course of action was to keep handing out supplies and just accept that some people are jerks.

The other part of the class was outraged... no, personally offended that somebody, somewhere was getting something they didn't deserve. Some of the kids were literally furious. That part of the class was trying to imagine all sorts of convoluted systems where people would have to prove that their house was destroyed before getting any help, just to ensure a few moochers didn't get a tent.

We were young, so we weren't politically aware yet. No one called themselves liberals or conservatives, republicans or democrats. But I remember looking at some of my class mates and being unable to wrap my heads around their thinking. I couldn't understand why they were so angry, why they would hurt so many just to stop one person. Their whole mindset was alien to me.

I wish I could go back and time and see that moment again, I would bet anything that the division in the class that day would very closely match a division between liberals and conservatives among those kids as adults today.
 
2012-07-05 03:43:23 PM  

Mike_LowELL: Maybe if you morons would look at the greater picture, you would understand why Republicans oppose balanced eating. Because, as conservative scientific studies have shown, fat particles block the electromagnetic indoctrination beams used by liberals in order to subvert our way of life. This is how come people in the South are fatter on average than those in the North. Southerners realize what Taxbongo is trying to do. So, in order to protect themselves, they eat "poorly". But in reality, they are eating smarter and healthier than any stupid lib. Prove me wrong.

after a summer of nourishing meals, these kids will do better when school resumes

It is harder to manipulate the thinking of more informed or brighter people.

VictoryCabal: couldn't understand why they were so angry, why they would hurt so many just to stop one person.


I sometimes think that is the mantra of conservatives. They will harm the majority to prevent the minority from getting something they don't deserve. By their logic, it is better to prevent many legitimate voters from voting because they don't have proper ID, in order to keep the few or the one who plans to commit fraud from voting.

I've always been one who thinks along the lines of "better for one guilty man to go free than 100 innocent men be locked up to ensure the guilty is punished," so I can't wrap my head around their thinking either.
 
2012-07-05 04:11:43 PM  
I realize this doesn't add much to the discussion, but I mean this, from the very bottom of my heart.

Fark these Republican asshats and those who defend them.
 
2012-07-05 04:16:16 PM  

Aarontology: Denying children a meal is exactly what Christ would do.


It's true. Remember when that "leper" Jesus healed turned out to just have a bad rash, so Jesus re-lepered all the people he had healed and bludgeoned Lazarus to death? It's true! It's in the Bible! ...somewhere in the back.
 
2012-07-05 04:17:11 PM  
Nothing makes me angrier than knowing that my tax dollars went to feeding children. It's an outrage I tell ya. Because of these freeloaders I have to wait until next year to buy a 60" LCD.
 
2012-07-05 04:18:38 PM  
Poor kids getting fed at least one square meal a day?

The horror.
The ... horror.
 
2012-07-05 04:20:52 PM  
These programs are so important that in the DC area when "day programs" were canceled because of the power outages this week, buses drove around to feed kids the meals they would have gotten at their school program. Imagine being from such a piece of shiat family that your one good meal a day comes from your school. It's not like they're giving away houses - the waste for a program like this has to be minuscule.
 
2012-07-05 04:25:31 PM  

Aarontology: Denying children a meal is exactly what Christ would do.


At least for the next 4 months or so. He knows as well as anyone his Dad only pays attention after Thanksgiving, so that's the only time you have to act good.
 
2012-07-05 04:28:20 PM  

Aarontology: Denying children a meal is exactly what Christ would do.


farm8.staticflickr.com
 
2012-07-05 04:35:46 PM  

Mike_LowELL: Because, as conservative scientific studies have shown, fat particles block the electromagnetic indoctrination beams used by liberals in order to subvert our way of life.


This is awesome.
 
2012-07-05 04:36:58 PM  

Lsherm: the waste for a program like this has to be minuscule.


According to this story about a school board president who lied about her income so her children could get a free lunch, the cost was about $5,000 for her two children over 5 years -- so $500 per child per school year, at least in NJ. That comes to $50 a month (assuming a 10 month school year) so for the summer that is $100 per ineligible poor child getting some extra squares this summer. The horrors! I spent twice that at the supermarket the other day.

/And it may be half that amount according to another figure in the article
//I hate POS people like her who ruins it for the truly needy
 
2012-07-05 04:43:30 PM  

make me some tea: Poor kids getting fed at least one square meal a day?

The horror.
The ... horror.


Not with my money, you don't! I'm not paying for those little monsters to be fed with MY MONEY. They can get jobs like the rest of us. Little entitled brats. That's what's wrong with our society these days.
 
2012-07-05 04:45:25 PM  

Di Atribe: Not with my money, you don't! I'm not paying for those little monsters to be fed with MY MONEY. They can get jobs like the rest of us. Little entitled brats. That's what's wrong with our society these days.


The hurr.
The ... hurr.
 
2012-07-05 04:45:34 PM  
But Jon Coupal with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association asks: "If someone is coming from a family that makes a quarter-of-a-million dollars a year, and they're not checking eligibility when they're coming in the door, I think most people would wonder, 'Am I paying for this?'"

There are probably a couple, maybe even a few upper middle class families saving five, maybe even six dollars every time their kids have a free meal. This is outrageous.
 
2012-07-05 04:53:41 PM  
Meanwhile, another GOP senator sucks Jamie Diamon's cawk to ease his pain for losing $7B more than first admitted.

The priorities of the right are clearly not the right priorities.
 
2012-07-05 04:54:18 PM  
er, Dimon
 
2012-07-05 04:55:01 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: There are probably a couple, maybe even a few upper middle class families saving five, maybe even six dollars every time their kids have a free meal. This is outrageous.


It would be no where near that. You could feed ONE child a nutritious meal for $5-6, but if you're feeding 50 children nutritious meals, it's probably not more than $1-2 per kid.
 
2012-07-05 04:55:14 PM  

VictoryCabal: I think the difference between conservatives and liberals really just boils down to a preference for avoiding type I errors vs. type II errors.

LIberals believe that feeding hungry children is important enough that we accept that a few people will game the system and get school meals that their children don't qualify for. Conservatives are willing to accept that a lot of children go hungry in order to make sure no one gets something they don't deserve.


That's a very good way to put it. There's also the issue of the perfect being the enemy of the good. In this case, it would be conservatives making an argument (as they do with anti-poverty measures, food stamps, etc) that here we are spending all this money to feed poor kids, and yet they're *still* hungry! Why waste all that money?!?!?

And I'll grant them that to a point, they're right. The government can't make everyone's life awesome. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't at least try to help prevent some people's lives from being miserable.
 
2012-07-05 04:59:26 PM  

what_now: Dusk-You-n-Me: There are probably a couple, maybe even a few upper middle class families saving five, maybe even six dollars every time their kids have a free meal. This is outrageous.

It would be no where near that. You could feed ONE child a nutritious meal for $5-6, but if you're feeding 50 children nutritious meals, it's probably not more than $1-2 per kid.


WHY IS MY TAXPAYER MONEY GOING TO FEED HUNGRY CHILDREN FOR JUST $1 A DAY?!!
 
2012-07-05 05:06:35 PM  
Look. I pay my taxes like any honest, hard-working American. Why should my money go to pay for other people's children, anyway? They're not my responsibility! I feed MY kids because I love them. I wish these poor people would just love their kids, too.
 
2012-07-05 05:08:35 PM  

damageddude: //I hate POS people like her who ruins it for the truly needy


Yeah, she sounds like a real POS. She overshot qualifying for the program by 100 grand a year! How farking greedy do you have to be to pull a stunt like that?
 
2012-07-05 05:15:58 PM  

make me some tea: WHY IS MY TAXPAYER MONEY GOING TO FEED HUNGRY CHILDREN FOR JUST $1 A DAY?!!


We're getting gouged, I've seen Sally Struthers say she can feed Ethiopians for far less

The private market is always more efficient!
 
2012-07-05 05:17:47 PM  

Di Atribe: Look. I pay my taxes like any honest, hard-working American. Why should my money go to pay for other people's children, anyway? They're not my responsibility! I feed MY kids because I love them. I wish these poor people would just love their kids, too.


Because not everyone can afford a Tony Romo commemorative annual self destruct in the playoffs tshirt?
 
2012-07-05 05:20:16 PM  
lh4.ggpht.com
 
2012-07-05 05:33:31 PM  
If a handful of people abuse the program, then it's much better to just nuke the entire program instead of just investigating those abusers & seeking compensation. If we keep the program, then what's next? Kids will learn that the government owes them everything and that all issues are starkly black & white with no in between. Sorry. That's life.
 
2012-07-05 05:38:53 PM  

VictoryCabal: I think the difference between conservatives and liberals really just boils down to a preference for avoiding type I errors vs. type II errors.

LIberals believe that feeding hungry children is important enough that we accept that a few people will game the system and get school meals that their children don't qualify for. Conservatives are willing to accept that a lot of children go hungry in order to make sure no one gets something they don't deserve.


Totally stolen.
 
2012-07-05 05:39:19 PM  

Di Atribe: If a handful of people abuse the program, then it's much better to just nuke the entire program instead of just investigating those abusers & seeking compensation. If we keep the program, then what's next? Kids will learn that the government owes them everything and that all issues are starkly black & white with no in between. Sorry. That's life.


This is what I was saying after Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder abused the salary cap. They should have just had the whole thing thrown out and tossed those offenders in prison. Then start over without a cap.
 
2012-07-05 05:43:39 PM  

Nadie_AZ: This is what I was saying after Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder abused the salary cap. They should have just had the whole thing thrown out and tossed those offenders in prison. Then start over without a cap.


Difference being, they didn't break any laws. They took advantage of a cap-free year and signed contracts that were approved by the league. Now quit trying to turn this into a football thread. This topic has PLENTY of ammo.
 
2012-07-05 05:50:36 PM  

Di Atribe: Nadie_AZ: This is what I was saying after Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder abused the salary cap. They should have just had the whole thing thrown out and tossed those offenders in prison. Then start over without a cap.

Difference being, they didn't break any laws. They took advantage of a cap-free year and signed contracts that were approved by the league. Now quit trying to turn this into a football thread. This topic has PLENTY of ammo.


Wait, this is the politics tab, right? Politics, today, is about what Team you are on. Just win, baby.
 
2012-07-05 05:56:27 PM  

Di Atribe: Nadie_AZ: This is what I was saying after Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder abused the salary cap. They should have just had the whole thing thrown out and tossed those offenders in prison. Then start over without a cap.

Difference being, they didn't break any laws. They took advantage of a cap-free year and signed contracts that were approved by the league. Now quit trying to turn this into a football thread. This topic has PLENTY of ammo.


This topic has NO ammo, you're either on the side of the asshole Jarvis Foundation or you are not, nobody is breaking any rules or deserves any punishment, there are no income requirements to be met.

One could argue that ok maybe there should be requirements to be met to be eligible, fair enough, but I would be willing to bet that this is just like the schools that have over 90% of their kids who get low cost or free lunches deciding to give them to the whole bunch because it SAVES them money by eliminating all the paperwork and people responsible for reviewing it. Well to do kids probably aren't taking advantage of these programs en masse instead of enjoying their summer vacation days
 
2012-07-05 05:59:50 PM  
And that above point doesn't even factor in the part about charity and non-profits sponsoring the damm things, they are free to run it however the fark they like
 
2012-07-05 06:08:19 PM  

martissimo: This topic has NO ammo, you're either on the side of the asshole Jarvis Foundation or you are not, nobody is breaking any rules or deserves any punishment, there are no income requirements to be met.


I agree. And while it may seem simple to you, I see this sort of outrage every day. The conservative entitlement outrage that makes them think that they are somehow the boss of every government program.

martissimo: One could argue that ok maybe there should be requirements to be met to be eligible, fair enough, but I would be willing to bet that this is just like the schools that have over 90% of their kids who get low cost or free lunches deciding to give them to the whole bunch because it SAVES them money by eliminating all the paperwork and people responsible for reviewing it. Well to do kids probably aren't taking advantage of these programs en masse instead of enjoying their summer vacation days


I totally agree. The only opinion we seem to differ on is whether this topic is good for mocking people with or not.
 
2012-07-05 06:10:38 PM  

Bathia_Mapes: I used to volunteer for the summer lunch program when my son was younger and there were two skinny little boys that gobbled down their lunches as fast as they could so they could get back in line with the hopes of getting a second lunch (sometimes we had extra lunches).


WHAT? Extra lunches! Government largesse! Someone audit these jerks who are wasting our money on EXTRA LUNCHES! Not a crumb shall be laid to waste, not with MY money. Make exactly the number of lunches you need or the entire program is just one more chunk of the bloated bureaucracy.
 
2012-07-05 06:13:26 PM  

Di Atribe: I agree. And while it may seem simple to you, I see this sort of outrage every day. The conservative entitlement outrage that makes them think that they are somehow the boss of every government program.


Glad we agree. I'll give the 'boys a pass this once. Just for you.
 
Displayed 50 of 273 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report