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.

(Talking Points Memo)   "No free school lunches" and the conservative war on reaching out. Reach-arounds still mandatory   (talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 142
    More: Dumbass, Rep. Paul Ryan, school lunches, private schools, National School Lunch Program, Jack Kingston, elementary schools, First Lady Michelle Obama  
•       •       •

1564 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Mar 2014 at 8:53 AM (24 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-11 08:22:53 AM
What the Republican free lunch program might look like.


www.argentinaindependent.com
 
2014-03-11 08:33:05 AM
If their mothers loved them they'd have packed lunch in a pail before their shifts!
Look at some of those slacker kids! Some of them even have backrests!
upload.wikimedia.org
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-03-11 08:36:26 AM
It's not like it used to be when Conservatives just didn't care about the poor, they seem to actively hate them now.
 
2014-03-11 08:51:07 AM
Nobody's bothering to consider the fact that perhaps Paul Ryan's speech was designed to stimulate the paper bag industry, which in turn would create jobs, which in turn would counteract the need for children to be given lunches, because their families would be able to afford food. And they'd probably get a discount on paper bags, too, seeing as how they work at the factory. Twenty percent, maybe. Thirty as a reward for the Employee of the Month. Job creation begins with these sorts of efforts, which liberals would know if their party did more than just pay lip service to the concept.
 
2014-03-11 08:56:05 AM
Jesus would have farking hated feeding poor people
 
2014-03-11 09:04:53 AM

Pocket Ninja: Nobody's bothering to consider the fact that perhaps Paul Ryan's speech was designed to stimulate the paper bag industry, which in turn would create jobs, which in turn would counteract the need for children to be given lunches, because their families would be able to afford food. And they'd probably get a discount on paper bags, too, seeing as how they work at the factory. Twenty percent, maybe. Thirty as a reward for the Employee of the Month. Job creation begins with these sorts of efforts, which liberals would know if their party did more than just pay lip service to the concept.


Um, yeha...no.  No one believes that, not even Paul Ryan himself.
 
2014-03-11 09:05:43 AM
What was Ryan's "fib" that he retold a story that was told to him?


And Kingston's horrific statement about kids working?

"But one of the things I've talked to the secretary of agriculture about: Why don't you have the kids pay a dime, pay a nickel to instill in them that there is, in fact, no such thing as a free lunch? Or maybe sweep the floor of the cafeteria -- and yes, I understand that that would be an administrative problem, and I understand that it would probably lose you money," he said at a Jackson County Republican Party meeting. "But think what we would gain as a society in getting people -- getting the myth out of their head that there is such a thing as a free lunch."

Have we met our daily quota for TPM's links today?

/daily 2 mnutes of hate.
 
2014-03-11 09:07:11 AM

BunkoSquad: Jesus would have farking hated feeding poor people


and got them drunk with sippy cups full of wine

why do you want our children to be drunks?
 
2014-03-11 09:07:48 AM
Danger Mouse:
Have we met our daily quota for TPM's links today?

/daily 2 mnutes of hate.


Two minutes isn't enough time to do the appropriate amount of hating on the modern GOP
 
2014-03-11 09:08:27 AM
What a Republican school program for poor children may look like;
newsimg.bbc.co.uk
 
2014-03-11 09:10:22 AM
The problem is not that kids think there is a free lunch and don't have work ethic.
The problem is that kids come from families that can't afford a three dollar school lunch.
Let's fix that problem.
 
2014-03-11 09:10:48 AM

A Cave Geek: Pocket Ninja: Nobody's bothering to consider the fact that perhaps Paul Ryan's speech was designed to stimulate the paper bag industry, which in turn would create jobs, which in turn would counteract the need for children to be given lunches, because their families would be able to afford food. And they'd probably get a discount on paper bags, too, seeing as how they work at the factory. Twenty percent, maybe. Thirty as a reward for the Employee of the Month. Job creation begins with these sorts of efforts, which liberals would know if their party did more than just pay lip service to the concept.

Um, yeha...no.  No one believes that, not even Paul Ryan himself.


Neither does Pocket Ninja.

/YHBT.  YHL.  HAND.
 
2014-03-11 09:11:29 AM

A Cave Geek: Pocket Ninja: Nobody's bothering to consider the fact that perhaps Paul Ryan's speech was designed to stimulate the paper bag industry, which in turn would create jobs, which in turn would counteract the need for children to be given lunches, because their families would be able to afford food. And they'd probably get a discount on paper bags, too, seeing as how they work at the factory. Twenty percent, maybe. Thirty as a reward for the Employee of the Month. Job creation begins with these sorts of efforts, which liberals would know if their party did more than just pay lip service to the concept.

Um, yeha...no.  No one believes that, not even Paul Ryan himself.


You're new here, aren't you?
 
2014-03-11 09:12:11 AM

A Cave Geek: Pocket Ninja: Nobody's bothering to consider the fact that perhaps Paul Ryan's speech was designed to stimulate the paper bag industry, which in turn would create jobs, which in turn would counteract the need for children to be given lunches, because their families would be able to afford food. And they'd probably get a discount on paper bags, too, seeing as how they work at the factory. Twenty percent, maybe. Thirty as a reward for the Employee of the Month. Job creation begins with these sorts of efforts, which liberals would know if their party did more than just pay lip service to the concept.

Um, yeha...no.  No one believes that, not even Paul Ryan himself.


you must be new
 
2014-03-11 09:12:21 AM

bmongar: Danger Mouse:
Have we met our daily quota for TPM's links today?

/daily 2 mnutes of hate.

Two minutes isn't enough time to do the appropriate amount of hating on the modern GOP


So from the linked article what has you so full of hate?
 
2014-03-11 09:12:40 AM
You have compelled these children to be in school for the day. A "free" lunch is the least you could do.
 
2014-03-11 09:12:57 AM
Denying children food is a great public relations move, this should go over well with most people.
 
2014-03-11 09:13:07 AM
There is a problem where thinking your income is linked to your moral goodness. It tends with those with the income loosing their heads.
 
2014-03-11 09:14:28 AM

Danger Mouse: What was Ryan's "fib" that he retold a story that was told to him?


He used a lie from another person's speech; that person is in Gov. Walker's cabinet and that lie was that SHE had met a child who didn't want a free lunch because it meant that "his mother didn't love him."  And that was her justification for getting rid of school lunches.

Never mind that she NEVER met ANY kid like that, but instead had plagiarized the story from a Mr. Maczyk, an anti-poverty and anti-child-hunger activist who experienced it as a child and uses that personal story to ARGUE FOR SCHOOL LUNCHES.  So a national-level politician, in a national-level speech uses a plagiarized, un-fact-checked story to demonize the poor and programs that feed poor kids.  "Fib" is being free-lunch-level generous with this liar.
 
2014-03-11 09:15:59 AM

BunkoSquad: Jesus would have farking hated feeding poor people


It does seem like a waste of mana.  Usually you save it for your party when you're stuck in a dungeon.  You don't use it on NPCs just for shiats and giggles.
 
2014-03-11 09:16:52 AM

factoryconnection: Danger Mouse: What was Ryan's "fib" that he retold a story that was told to him?

He used a lie from another person's speech; that person is in Gov. Walker's cabinet and that lie was that SHE had met a child who didn't want a free lunch because it meant that "his mother didn't love him."  And that was her justification for getting rid of school lunches.

Never mind that she NEVER met ANY kid like that, but instead had plagiarized the story from a Mr. Maczyk, an anti-poverty and anti-child-hunger activist who experienced it as a child and uses that personal story to ARGUE FOR SCHOOL LUNCHES.  So a national-level politician, in a national-level speech uses a plagiarized, un-fact-checked story to demonize the poor and programs that feed poor kids.  "Fib" is being free-lunch-level generous with this liar.


There was an actual kid. He wanted his free lunch in a paper bag to avoid being stigmatized.
 
2014-03-11 09:18:03 AM

Epic Fap Session: There was an actual kid. He wanted his free lunch in a paper bag to avoid being stigmatized.



Hahahaha no. That was a story lifted from a work of fiction, IIRC.
 
2014-03-11 09:18:16 AM

Headso: Denying children food is a great public relations move, this should go over well with most people.


If anything we should be feeding poor children more food, so that we can fatten them up and use them as a cheap substitute for beef.
 
2014-03-11 09:18:51 AM
FTFA: "It's also a dog-whistle to the idea, which has grown popular on the right in the Obama era, that too many able-bodied people are lazy and mooching off the federal government."

Um, pretty sure that's been around since at least Reagan, if not before then.  Conservatives have been calling poor people moochers for a llllllloooooooonnnnnngggggggg time.
 
2014-03-11 09:20:55 AM
I don't understand how lunch isn't included as part of a free and public education.  Everyone should get a lunch.
 
2014-03-11 09:20:58 AM

Danger Mouse: What was Ryan's "fib" that he retold a story that was told to him?


And Kingston's horrific statement about kids working?

"But one of the things I've talked to the secretary of agriculture about: Why don't you have the kids pay a dime, pay a nickel to instill in them that there is, in fact, no such thing as a free lunch? Or maybe sweep the floor of the cafeteria -- and yes, I understand that that would be an administrative problem, and I understand that it would probably lose you money," he said at a Jackson County Republican Party meeting. "But think what we would gain as a society in getting people -- getting the myth out of their head that there is such a thing as a free lunch."


It's funny how people like you, Ryan, and Kingston seem so obsessed with teaching kids with little to no money the value of that money but ignore whether that value is ever instilled in people who HAVE money.

It's easy to say there's no such thing as a free lunch when you can pay for your lunch and look down on people who get them for free or at a discount. You never seem interested in teaching kids who have money given to them by their parents, who have lunches handed to them by their parents, that there is "no such thing as a free lunch." No, the poor kids should work for their lunch, but the middle-class and rich kids don't need to. THAT is the message you're sending. That is why you and everyone who're defending is a shiatlord. Ryan's alleged plagiarism is beside the point.

You want to teach kids the value of money? Teach kids to whom money is freely given the value of it. That's just as important as teaching kids who have no money and whose parents have little money the value of it. You don't think there's such a thing as a free lunch? Make every kid work for it. The lesson you're trying to teach poor kids by saying they should work for their food is precisely the opposite lesson you're teaching kids who already get food: that they're superior. That they don't need to work. That they have money and that makes them better. And fark that message.
 
2014-03-11 09:21:22 AM
"A little boy told me, 'Nobody at my house loves me or cares if I have enough to eat.' And that is why school lunch is bad and liberals are bad." -- Rand Paul Ryan
 
2014-03-11 09:21:25 AM
 

factoryconnection: Danger Mouse: What was Ryan's "fib" that he retold a story that was told to him?

He used a lie from another person's speech; that person is in Gov. Walker's cabinet and that lie was that SHE had met a child who didn't want a free lunch because it meant that "his mother didn't love him."  And that was her justification for getting rid of school lunches.

Never mind that she NEVER met ANY kid like that, but instead had plagiarized the story from a Mr. Maczyk, an anti-poverty and anti-child-hunger activist who experienced it as a child and uses that personal story to ARGUE FOR SCHOOL LUNCHES.  So a national-level politician, in a national-level speech uses a plagiarized, un-fact-checked story to demonize the poor and programs that feed poor kids.  "Fib" is being free-lunch-level generous with this liar.



So you're mad at Elosie Anderson?  I's not as Ryan even tried to pass the "story off as his own". In fact he said "You know, this reminds me of a story I heard from Eloise Anderson"  

"Mother didn't love him"?  You completley missed the point.


Keep trying. What in the article has you so mad?
 
2014-03-11 09:22:22 AM

Danger Mouse: So from the linked article what has you so full of hate?



Well for me, it's the idea that you're doing a kid a favor to force them to be janitors while paying them $0.05/day if they want to eat lunch.
 
2014-03-11 09:22:38 AM

Danger Mouse: Have we met our daily quota for TPM's links today?

/daily 2 mnutes of hate.


There has been ONE TPM link so far today out of a dozen, and you're being whiny and defensive that someone would dare point out the moral and logistical flaws in the sentiment expressed by the people you support.
 
2014-03-11 09:24:40 AM

phaseolus: Danger Mouse: So from the linked article what has you so full of hate?


Well for me, it's the idea that you're doing a kid a favor to force them to be janitors while paying them $0.05/day if they want to eat lunch.


For me, it's the twin sentiments of "There's no such thing as a free lunch" and "Boys will be boys." Because those sentiments combine into "If you are poor, you will learn from farking childhood how much you are a part of the underclass. You deserve to be singled out, separated, and made to work while your betters don't. Those betters will then laugh at you and pick on your and bully you for having to work, because your parents don't have as much money as their parents. Your psyche will be ground into meal before you hit puberty, and that's how we sincerely believe the world should work."
 
2014-03-11 09:24:58 AM
Keeping children hungry. It's a bold strategy, Cotton, let's see if it pays out for them.
 
2014-03-11 09:25:00 AM

factoryconnection: Danger Mouse: What was Ryan's "fib" that he retold a story that was told to him?

He used a lie from another person's speech; that person is in Gov. Walker's cabinet and that lie was that SHE had met a child who didn't want a free lunch because it meant that "his mother didn't love him."  And that was her justification for getting rid of school lunches.

Never mind that she NEVER met ANY kid like that, but instead had plagiarized the story from a Mr. Maczyk, an anti-poverty and anti-child-hunger activist who experienced it as a child and uses that personal story to ARGUE FOR SCHOOL LUNCHES.  So a national-level politician, in a national-level speech uses a plagiarized, un-fact-checked story to demonize the poor and programs that feed poor kids.  "Fib" is being free-lunch-level generous with this liar.


No person with a shred of decency would have used that story to facilitate the starving of children. And none ever had.
 
2014-03-11 09:25:05 AM

A Cave Geek: Pocket Ninja: Nobody's bothering to consider the fact that perhaps Paul Ryan's speech was designed to stimulate the paper bag industry, which in turn would create jobs, which in turn would counteract the need for children to be given lunches, because their families would be able to afford food. And they'd probably get a discount on paper bags, too, seeing as how they work at the factory. Twenty percent, maybe. Thirty as a reward for the Employee of the Month. Job creation begins with these sorts of efforts, which liberals would know if their party did more than just pay lip service to the concept.

Um, yeha...no.  No one believes that, not even Paul Ryan himself.


seasonalchats.com
 
2014-03-11 09:25:09 AM

phaseolus: Epic Fap Session: There was an actual kid. He wanted his free lunch in a paper bag to avoid being stigmatized.


Hahahaha no. That was a story lifted from a work of fiction, IIRC.


Hahahaha, yes. You do not RC.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/03/06/a-sto ry -too-good-to-check-paul-ryan-and-the-story-of-the-brown-paper-bag/
 
2014-03-11 09:25:50 AM

phaseolus: Epic Fap Session: There was an actual kid. He wanted his free lunch in a paper bag to avoid being stigmatized.


Hahahaha no. That was a story lifted from a work of fiction, IIRC.


Not fiction, but nothing to do with anything the gop tried to make it relevant to.

Details here.
 
2014-03-11 09:25:57 AM
Can someone walk me through what their endgame is here?  OK, let's assume they're successful and low income children no longer get a free or discounted school lunch.  Then what?
 
2014-03-11 09:27:08 AM

Doctor Funkenstein: Can someone walk me through what their endgame is here?  OK, let's assume they're successful and low income children no longer get a free or discounted school lunch.  Then what?


Freedom, duh.
 
2014-03-11 09:27:15 AM
The Republican veiw on this seems to be that if a student doesn't have money for lunch, their parents must not care about them, and if their parents don't care about them, no one else should either.
 
2014-03-11 09:27:46 AM

Doctor Funkenstein: Can someone walk me through what their endgame is here?  OK, let's assume they're successful and low income children no longer get a free or discounted school lunch.  Then what?


You assume they have a goal in mind.
 
2014-03-11 09:27:48 AM

A Cave Geek: Pocket Ninja: Nobody's bothering to consider the fact that perhaps Paul Ryan's speech was designed to stimulate the paper bag industry, which in turn would create jobs, which in turn would counteract the need for children to be given lunches, because their families would be able to afford food. And they'd probably get a discount on paper bags, too, seeing as how they work at the factory. Twenty percent, maybe. Thirty as a reward for the Employee of the Month. Job creation begins with these sorts of efforts, which liberals would know if their party did more than just pay lip service to the concept.

Um, yeha...no.  No one believes that, not even Paul Ryan himself.


Is this the part where we point out that you're new and Pocket Ninja is a Fark Legend?
 
2014-03-11 09:27:50 AM

Doctor Funkenstein: Can someone walk me through what their endgame is here?  OK, let's assume they're successful and low income children no longer get a free or discounted school lunch.  Then what?


There is no endgame. There is no follow-through. They are entirely reactionary. They believe "magic" will happen at some point if they let the market function as freely and unregulated as possible and/or they codify religious tenets, and that will make everything better. They have no process to actually move from "Cut school lunches" to "The country gets better." They don't even consider the indirect or direct results of their actions.
 
2014-03-11 09:27:50 AM

Doctor Funkenstein: Can someone walk me through what their endgame is here?  OK, let's assume they're successful and low income children no longer get a free or discounted school lunch.  Then what?


if you cut out enough little things you get one big tax cut for the rich.
 
2014-03-11 09:29:00 AM

eldritch2k4: A Cave Geek: Pocket Ninja: Nobody's bothering to consider the fact that perhaps Paul Ryan's speech was designed to stimulate the paper bag industry, which in turn would create jobs, which in turn would counteract the need for children to be given lunches, because their families would be able to afford food. And they'd probably get a discount on paper bags, too, seeing as how they work at the factory. Twenty percent, maybe. Thirty as a reward for the Employee of the Month. Job creation begins with these sorts of efforts, which liberals would know if their party did more than just pay lip service to the concept.

Um, yeha...no.  No one believes that, not even Paul Ryan himself.

Is this the part where we point out that you're new and Pocket Ninja is a Fark Legend?


Repeatedly. Point taken.....repeatedly.
 
2014-03-11 09:29:09 AM

Doctor Funkenstein: Can someone walk me through what their endgame is here?  OK, let's assume they're successful and low income children no longer get a free or discounted school lunch.  Then what?


Then the poors realize they have to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, which makes them stop being poor.  Then 0% unemployment and 0% poverty rate, and Obama has to go back to Kenya.  Study it out.
 
2014-03-11 09:29:57 AM

Doctor Funkenstein: Can someone walk me through what their endgame is here?  OK, let's assume they're successful and low income children no longer get a free or discounted school lunch.  Then what?


babby jeebuz wins and ayn rand becomes president?


/got nuttin
 
2014-03-11 09:30:24 AM

holdmybones: phaseolus: Epic Fap Session: There was an actual kid. He wanted his free lunch in a paper bag to avoid being stigmatized.


Hahahaha no. That was a story lifted from a work of fiction, IIRC.

Hahahaha, yes. You do not RC.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/03/06/a-sto ry -too-good-to-check-paul-ryan-and-the-story-of-the-brown-paper-bag/



Okay, I stand corrected.


Bloody William: phaseolus: Danger Mouse: So from the linked article what has you so full of hate?


Well for me, it's the idea that you're doing a kid a favor to force them to be janitors while paying them $0.05/day if they want to eat lunch.

For me, it's the twin sentiments of "There's no such thing as a free lunch" and "Boys will be boys." Because those sentiments combine into "If you are poor, you will learn from farking childhood how much you are a part of the underclass. You deserve to be singled out, separated, and made to work while your betters don't. Those betters will then laugh at you and pick on your and bully you for having to work, because your parents don't have as much money as their parents. Your psyche will be ground into meal before you hit puberty, and that's how we sincerely believe the world should work."



I agree, and you've put it much better than I did. Also there's that idea that programs like subsidized school lunches are "buying votes".
 
2014-03-11 09:31:07 AM

Danger Mouse: What was Ryan's "fib" that he retold a story that was told to him?


And Kingston's horrific statement about kids working?

"But one of the things I've talked to the secretary of agriculture about: Why don't you have the kids pay a dime, pay a nickel to instill in them that there is, in fact, no such thing as a free lunch? Or maybe sweep the floor of the cafeteria -- and yes, I understand that that would be an administrative problem, and I understand that it would probably lose you money," he said at a Jackson County Republican Party meeting. "But think what we would gain as a society in getting people -- getting the myth out of their head that there is such a thing as a free lunch."

Have we met our daily quota for TPM's links today?

/daily 2 mnutes of hate.


How many free lunches has Paul Ryan received?  How about lunches where he is actually given money for showing up?  How about Kingston?  It's not just hypocrisy, it's basically flat out sociopathy for these people, and their defenders (such as yourself) to claim that hungry children should not be fed, to absolve yourselves of all responsibility for your fellow humanity while reaping the benefits of the society the rest of us work so hard to maintain.

You all are literally becoming cartoonish monsters.  Thankfully you're also creating a multi-generational hatred of all things conservative, which is nice.  When you try to unravel the basic tenets of society, it's amazing how it will eventually come back to bite you in the ass.
 
2014-03-11 09:32:20 AM

Doctor Funkenstein: Can someone walk me through what their endgame is here?  OK, let's assume they're successful and low income children no longer get a free or discounted school lunch.  Then what?


Hungry children have a more difficult time learning. Less educated poor people have a harder time competing for jobs and tend to stay poor. This not only maintains the current class system that keeps the poor "in their place", but ignorant people are actually willing to vote for these GOP a-holes. Win/win from a Republic perspective.
 
2014-03-11 09:32:37 AM

error 303: The Republican veiw on this seems to be that if a student doesn't have money for lunch, their parents must not care about them, and if their parents don't care about them, no one else should either.


The original original original quote:

"Once I heard someone say, 'what was important to him as a boy was that he didn't want school lunch, he wanted a brown bag because the brown bag that he brought with his lunch in it meant that his mom cared about him.'"

This is likely the closest thing to the actual interaction we'll get. And I believe it. I just don't draw the conclusions gained from it in the telephone chain that goes to Ryan. In fact, I think his conclusion is as wrongheaded and disgusting as the conclusion that being gay is inherently bad because more gay teens kill themselves than straight teens.

Children don't go to school alone. They go to school with other children. Cliques are formed and social strata are built. Why would the kid think a brown bag lunch meant kids mom cared about him? Because kids whose better off (and generally more hands-on and active) parents give them their lunch to take in give him that impression, and possibly outright tell him that. "You didn't bring a lunch like us? Your mom must not love you." And why would he want a brown bag even if it was just to put his school lunch in it? So they wouldn't keep telling him that.

Ryan and the people defending him are completely ignoring the causes and processes that lead to the situation, and only focus on one part of the conclusion to support their beliefs that would only hurt the kid more.
 
Displayed 50 of 142 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report