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.

(The Raw Story)   According to Fox News' Stuart Varney, the point of food stamp cuts isn't to save federal money... it's to punish poor people   (rawstory.com) divider line 183
    More: Asinine, Stuart Varney, SNAP, Fox News, poor people, Brian Kilmeade  
•       •       •

2588 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Mar 2014 at 3:39 PM (24 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-11 02:42:31 PM
what a vindictive little prick.
 
2014-03-11 02:45:48 PM
Can we drop this little prick into the Atlantic and see if he'll float back home?  We don't want him any more.
 
2014-03-11 02:47:46 PM
I guess they can drop that fake moniker of "Compassionate Conservative" now, right? (or have they dropped it years ago when the blah guy first came into office?)
 
2014-03-11 02:48:39 PM
"You are told that you are taking food out of the mouths of children. You're making people starve. You are bad because you're cutting. You can't win! How will we ever get a handle on our debt if you can't cut $8 billion out of food stamps over a 10-year period? How will you ever do that?"

How is cutting $8 billion going to help the deficit when defense spending is over $700 billion a year?  Cut 2% from the military and you're way past $8 billion, you worthless piece of stinking garbage.
 
2014-03-11 02:53:40 PM
If you're looking to trim the fat, let's start with the military, which is EASILY 10 times the size needed to protect our own borders.
 
2014-03-11 02:55:54 PM
"You are demagogued to death!" Varney cried. "You are told that you are taking food out of the mouths of children. You're making people starve. You are bad because you're cutting. You can't win! How will we ever get a handle on our debt if you can't cut $8 billion out of food stamps over a 10-year period? How will you ever do that?"
 

$800M/year is .1% of the annual military budget. But I'm sure there's no fat there to trim.
 
2014-03-11 02:56:15 PM

Marcus Aurelius: How is cutting $8 billion going to help the deficit when defense spending is over $700 billion a year?


I never liked the "because it isn't everything means it does nothing" argument. $8 billion in cuts is $8 billion removed from the deficit.

However:

Marcus Aurelius: Cut 2% from the military and you're way past $8 billion, you worthless piece of stinking garbage.


This is still a valid statement.
 
2014-03-11 02:57:59 PM
Who would Jesus starve?
 
2014-03-11 03:00:57 PM

nmrsnr: Marcus Aurelius: How is cutting $8 billion going to help the deficit when defense spending is over $700 billion a year?

I never liked the "because it isn't everything means it does nothing" argument. $8 billion in cuts is $8 billion removed from the deficit.

However:

Marcus Aurelius: Cut 2% from the military and you're way past $8 billion, you worthless piece of stinking garbage.

This is still a valid statement.


Sorry for ranting.  I am becoming highly intolerant of these people.  How anyone can watch this channel is way beyond me.  All the 24x7 channels are bad, but FOX is positively toxic.
 
2014-03-11 03:01:08 PM
I propose a truce in the Class War. Quit trying to take that slice of bread out of that kid's mouth, and we'll quit calling bankers "farking bankers".
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-03-11 03:03:46 PM
I think we pretty much knew that.
 
2014-03-11 03:05:29 PM

Marcus Aurelius: How anyone can watch this channel is way beyond me


I'll give you a hint: Arizona & Florida demographics.
 
2014-03-11 03:10:19 PM
How will we ever get a handle on our debt if you can't cut $8 billion out of food stamps over a 10-year period? How will you ever do that?"


Well, you pedantic little prick, we could start with the USS Gerald Ford, which is ESTIMATED to cost $17.5 billion dollars and is a first of it's kind super carrier.

But we need that, right? Because of this guy:

www.independent.co.uk
 
2014-03-11 03:17:03 PM

Sin_City_Superhero: Marcus Aurelius: How anyone can watch this channel is way beyond me

I'll give you a hint: Arizona & Florida demographics.


The heat stroked and drug addled?
 
2014-03-11 03:20:37 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Sorry for ranting. I am becoming highly intolerant of these people.


That's fine, but your argument was the same one that the right used to argue that $70 billion (or whatever the actual number was) in revenue from increasing taxes on those making over $250k was insignificant in light of the $700 billion deficit, so why bother? It wasn't a very good argument then, and it's still not a good argument. The good argument is: because taking food out of the mouth of children is monstrous, especially if you are doing it so that you don't have to stop building tanks and aircraft that nobody wants.
 
2014-03-11 03:36:53 PM
We get it, Republicans hate poor people and wish they would die or just go away somehow. We know.
 
2014-03-11 03:37:45 PM

nmrsnr: Marcus Aurelius: Sorry for ranting. I am becoming highly intolerant of these people.

That's fine, but your argument was the same one that the right used to argue that $70 billion (or whatever the actual number was) in revenue from increasing taxes on those making over $250k was insignificant in light of the $700 billion deficit, so why bother? It wasn't a very good argument then, and it's still not a good argument. The good argument is: because taking food out of the mouth of children is monstrous, especially if you are doing it so that you don't have to stop building tanks and aircraft that nobody wants.


Noted.  I will restrain myself from here on out.
 
2014-03-11 03:41:09 PM
The obvious tag starve to death or something?
 
2014-03-11 03:41:27 PM

kronicfeld: $800M/year is .1% of the annual military budget. But I'm sure there's no fat there to trim.


The trouble is that cutting military budgets is dangerous politically. If something bad does happen, you're tarred and feathered because "HE DIDN'T KEEP US SAFE"

Rather than cut the costs, let's start defraying them by billing others for military services rendered.

"Hey, ExxonMobil.. that's a nice little straight you've got over there. It costs $1million/day to keep our carrier group there... It would be a shame if they left and something bad happened"
 
2014-03-11 03:42:21 PM
There was a time when they weren't so obvious with the greed.
 
2014-03-11 03:42:22 PM
Obvious tag can't qualify for benefits anymore?
 
2014-03-11 03:43:39 PM

Eddie Adams from Torrance: The trouble is that cutting military budgets is dangerous politically.


I get that, but I'm appalled that "hungry children" isn't more politically dangerous.
 
2014-03-11 03:43:51 PM
No one is feeding people for votes, you ignorant arrogant little asshat.

We're feeding people because they're human, they're hungry, and it is the right thing to do.

/an idea totally lost on you, I know.
 
2014-03-11 03:44:35 PM
So, unable to say the phrase "compassionate convervatism" with a straight face anymore, they've moved on to "life for people who have it hard should suck even more if we have any say over it."  Very nice.
 
2014-03-11 03:44:40 PM

what_now: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The trouble is that cutting military budgets is dangerous politically.

I get that, but I'm appalled that "hungry children" isn't more politically dangerous.


Jesus, right? What has happened to our national moral compass?
 
2014-03-11 03:45:10 PM
I find the parallels between Republican social policy and torture very interesting, especially that both are predicated on the use of enforced pain or suffering in order to alter behavior.
 
2014-03-11 03:45:19 PM
Ah yes, they have stumbled on onto the democrats master plan to enslave the population of poors by feeding them and robbing them of their dignity and their soul.
//on the bright side it seems you have to be soul-less to vote republican so this may backfire
 
2014-03-11 03:46:09 PM
"It shows you, once you've got a program, you can never get rid of it and it's very difficult to cut.

Actually, it's very easy.  You just cut funding to it, which is not what was done here.  Here, they merely raised the states' copays to $20, which several states thought was a worthwhile expenditure to keep their citizenry from starvation.

do you want to be the party that goes up to the poor and says, 'Take that back'?" Kilmeade said.

Apparently, you do.

"You are demagogued to death!" Varney cried. "You are told that you are taking food out of the mouths of children. You're making people starve.

Yes, you are being demagogued.  Because, yes, you are taking the food out of the mouths of children.  Did you not catch Rand Paul's CPAC speech?

Face it Fox.  Republicans looked at this change and thought it was worth it.  Democrats (and probably a few state-level Republicans) looked at this change and thought spending the extra $20 to get more than that back as assistance to their citizens was worth it.  If you have a problem with what you did, then maybe you shouldn't have done it.
 
2014-03-11 03:46:11 PM

what_now: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The trouble is that cutting military budgets is dangerous politically.

I get that, but I'm appalled that "hungry children" isn't more politically dangerous.


You can't fire hungry children into Baghdad and blow up a building!

...Or can you?
 
2014-03-11 03:46:37 PM
"How will we ever get a handle on our debt if you can't cut $8 billion out of food stamps over a 10-year period? How will you ever do that?"

Getting a handle on our debt is easy ... raise taxes until there is no more deficit and then just hold spending at that level until the debt is serviced. Unfortunately the right wing religious anti-tax nut jobs fight tooth and nail to prevent such an occurrence.
 
2014-03-11 03:46:55 PM
I can't wait to hear the derp behind this one. So who do you guys think our first contestant will be?
 
2014-03-11 03:47:03 PM

Confabulat: We get it, Republicans hate poor people and wish they would die or just go away somehow. We know.


I'm sure you've seen the numbers comparing Republicans' charitable contributions versus Democrats.  Because you have a different idea on how to help poor people doesn't mean you hate them.
 
2014-03-11 03:47:50 PM
Little Billy, just remember that when your stomach hurts tonight because we don't have enough food, Stuart Varney really has it worse because you're demagoguing him to exasperation.
 
2014-03-11 03:48:07 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Can we drop this little prick into the Atlantic and see if he'll float back home?  We don't want him any more.


That's pollution. Shoot him up with the Mars 01 crew, at least he'd be the first space janitor.
 
2014-03-11 03:48:10 PM

what_now: Well, you pedantic little prick, we could start with the USS Gerald Ford, which is ESTIMATED to cost $17.5 billion dollars and is a first of it's kind super carrier.

But we need that, right? Because of this guy:


Thing is, maybe we do need that thing, maybe we don't, but Congress spends buttloads of money on stuff THE MILITARY ITSELF SAYS THEY DON'T NEED.  Apparently we can't even cut the stuff that the military doesn't even want.
 
2014-03-11 03:48:14 PM

Eddie Adams from Torrance: Rather than cut the costs, let's start defraying them by billing others for military services rendered.

"Hey, ExxonMobil.. that's a nice little straight you've got over there. It costs $1million/day to keep our carrier group there... It would be a shame if they left and something bad happened"


Given that we can't get Exxon/Mobil to clean up their own messes, I have a feeling getting them to run their own security would be a long, hard fight indeed.
 
2014-03-11 03:48:19 PM

what_now: How will we ever get a handle on our debt if you can't cut $8 billion out of food stamps over a 10-year period? How will you ever do that?"


Well, you pedantic little prick, we could start with the USS Gerald Ford, which is ESTIMATED to cost $17.5 billion dollars and is a first of it's kind super carrier.

But we need that, right? Because of this guy:

[www.independent.co.uk image 620x465]


That's not why we need it.  We need it because, from your link:
Gerald R. Ford will enter the fleet replacing the inactive  Enterprise (CVN-65), which ended its 51 years of active service in December 2012.

Now, the defense budget's line items do fall into three categories:
Cannot be cut
Can be cut
Should be cut

I do agree with you that a very significant portion of it falls into the latter two categories, the USS Gerald R Ford is really not one of them.
 
2014-03-11 03:48:44 PM
76% of SNAP households included a child, an elderly person, or a disabled person. These vulnerable households receive 83% of all SNAP benefits.

Why would you want to get rid of this program, Stu?
 
2014-03-11 03:48:58 PM

ISOLATED INCIDENT! ROGUE STAFFER! FOX DOESN'T SPEAK FOR REPUBLICANS!

 
2014-03-11 03:49:51 PM

Slaves2Darkness: "How will we ever get a handle on our debt if you can't cut $8 billion out of food stamps over a 10-year period? How will you ever do that?"

Getting a handle on our debt is easy ... raise taxes until there is no more deficit and then just hold spending at that level until the debt is serviced. Unfortunately the right wing religious anti-tax nut jobs fight tooth and nail to prevent such an occurrence.


I especially enjoy the implicit assertion that we cannot get a handle on the debt unless we let poor people go hungry.
 
2014-03-11 03:50:25 PM
You can't win! How will we ever get a handle on our debt if you can't cut $8 billion out of food stamps over a 10-year period? How will you ever do that?


How about not building 500 biilion dollar planes that don't work and not building tanks just to sit in a desert to die? Can we start there?
 
2014-03-11 03:51:12 PM

Cat Food Sandwiches: Because you have a different idea on how to help poor people doesn't mean you hate them.


That is utter bullshiat. I've listened to enough Republicans talk. They DESPISE poor people and always blame them for being poor. Every time.

Republicans WANT poor people to suffer. They believe they deserve it. They say as much out loud all the time.
 
2014-03-11 03:51:17 PM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: what_now: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The trouble is that cutting military budgets is dangerous politically.

I get that, but I'm appalled that "hungry children" isn't more politically dangerous.

You can't fire hungry children into Baghdad and blow up a building!

...Or can you?


we wont know until we try. for science!
 
2014-03-11 03:51:22 PM

Karac: "You are demagogued to death!" Varney cried. "You are told that you are taking food out of the mouths of children. You're making people starve.

Yes, you are being demagogued. Because, yes, you are taking the food out of the mouths of children. Did you not catch Rand Paul's CPAC speech?


Or that other pantywaist pussified commie who never met a conflict he couldn't cut and run from:

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."

// yup, still Rand Paul
 
2014-03-11 03:51:54 PM

GQueue: Thing is, maybe we do need that thing,


lol
 
2014-03-11 03:52:51 PM

Marcus Aurelius: "You are told that you are taking food out of the mouths of children. You're making people starve. You are bad because you're cutting. You can't win! How will we ever get a handle on our debt if you can't cut $8 billion out of food stamps over a 10-year period? How will you ever do that?"

How is cutting $8 billion going to help the deficit when defense spending is over $700 billion a year?  Cut 2% from the military and you're way past $8 billion, you worthless piece of stinking garbage.


"you can't ever win!"

Uhhh, well I guess that depends on exactly what game you were playing in the first place,  though I'm really not sure I want to know the rules of the one that has "More poor people starving to death" as a victory condition
 
2014-03-11 03:53:06 PM

qorkfiend: I find the parallels between Republican social policy and torture very interesting, especially that both are predicated on the use of enforced pain or suffering in order to alter behavior.


Authoritarians only understand coercion as a motivator. Hence "taxes: legal theft" and the idea that rapists are compelled to rape by the coercive sluttiness of women in short skirts.
 
2014-03-11 03:54:15 PM

what_now: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The trouble is that cutting military budgets is dangerous politically.

I get that, but I'm appalled that "hungry children" isn't more politically dangerous.


Because we're dealing with these kinds of people:

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-03-11 03:54:28 PM

Soup4Bonnie: 76% of SNAP households included a child, an elderly person, or a disabled person. These vulnerable households receive 83% of all SNAP benefits.

Why would you want to get rid of this program, Stu?


The standard Fark-right answer is they are all faking the disability and just living large on the public dole.
 
2014-03-11 03:54:52 PM

what_now: Eddie Adams from Torrance: The trouble is that cutting military budgets is dangerous politically.

I get that, but I'm appalled that "hungry children" isn't more politically dangerous.


The Overton Window is slowly sinking in the middle of the Atlantic.
 
Displayed 50 of 183 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report