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.

(Payson Roundup)   Local Tea Partier thinks that rather than giving kids free lunches with Federal dollars, their parents should get counseling to stop being so poor. She, of course, voted against giving the kids something to eat so they can learn a lesson   (paysonroundup.com) divider line 210
    More: Fail  
•       •       •

3443 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Aug 2014 at 5:49 PM (9 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-08-16 03:14:46 PM  
I once ran for school board in a district that provided zero school lunch. At any grade level. You either brought it from home, or mom and dad brought it for you, or they picked you up for lunch. Part of my platform was to provide school lunches, at least to the elementary and middle-school kids, who couldn't fend for themselves. At least the high school had an open campus. Oh my God. I got accosted by the grandmotherly lunch lady from the high school who proceeded to accost me as being a fascist; why, she remembered when there WAS school lunch, and do you know how many kids would just waste food? She'd rather have no lunch at all than see that much food wasted!

This was a decade ago in a "socialist" state, and I was running as a Republican, but I was one of the "liberal" candidates for suggesting farking school lunch be made available to 5-12 year old children.
 
2014-08-16 03:17:12 PM  
I'm guessing members of the Tea Party have never been poor themselves, or have selectively forgot they were at one point in their lives....
 
2014-08-16 03:23:02 PM  
Answer a survey question to continue reading this content.

F*ck you is my answer
 
2014-08-16 03:23:49 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Answer a survey question to continue reading this content.

F*ck you is my answer


Came to say exactly this.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-08-16 03:23:50 PM  
And most of the comments are from people who support her.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-08-16 03:34:19 PM  
The funny thing is that most of these people think they are good Christians.

I wonder if they have ever even read the bible?
 
2014-08-16 03:39:19 PM  

vpb: The funny thing is that most of these people think they are good Christians.

I wonder if they have ever even read the bible?


Probably not.  Most churchgoers rely completely on what their pastor/priest interprets the book to say.
 
2014-08-16 03:40:51 PM  
FTFA: "However ... some of these people out in the community, that are having children that the parents are really struggling or if the parents are just absentee brain-wise parents because they are on drugs

Oh look, its an AZ Republican just making shiat up to justify what she wants to do in the first place.

Must be a day ending in "Y."
 
2014-08-16 03:41:43 PM  

vpb: And most of the comments are from people who support her.


Of course. Ever been to Payson or anywhere else in rural AZ?
 
2014-08-16 03:44:57 PM  

Forbidden Doughnut: I'm guessing members of the Tea Party have never been poor themselves, or have selectively forgot they were at one point in their lives....


What do you mean? Many of them *are* poor.
 
2014-08-16 03:45:50 PM  

Somacandra: vpb: And most of the comments are from people who support her.

Of course. Ever been to Payson or anywhere else in rural AZ?


*raises hand*

I live here. I may be slowly going insane up here, though. Please don't judge all of us. There are a (very) few people here who aren't actually going out of our way to be assholes and misanthropes.
 
2014-08-16 03:56:43 PM  

vpb: The funny thing is that most of these people think they are good Christians.

I wonder if they have ever even read the bible?


Only the part that God hates gays.

And since Leviticus and Paul didn't say anthing about feeding the poor or children, they don't have to.
 
2014-08-16 03:56:57 PM  
She actually suggested a 12-step program to get them off of being addicted to poverty.Just let that little fact sink in.
 
2014-08-16 03:58:43 PM  

vpb: The funny thing is that most of these people think they are good Christians.

I wonder if they have ever even read the bible?


They read (or, more likely have been told about) the part that says 'if you don't work, you don't eat.'
F*ck those kids. Put 'em to work if they want lunch. It's what Jesus wanted.
 
2014-08-16 03:58:55 PM  
Apparently this biatch thinks just before you get pregnant you are presented a crystal ball that shows you whether you are going to lose your job, have serious health problems, etc as well as predict every economic downturn for the next 18  years so you can know whether or not you can afford your kids.  I think she's dependent on selfishness and simplemindedness and she needs treatment.
 
2014-08-16 04:07:44 PM  
I'm absolutely CERTAIN that that principled seahag refuses to cash her Social Security checks or use her Medicaid benefits.
 
2014-08-16 04:18:17 PM  

brap: I'm absolutely CERTAIN that that principled seahag refuses to cash her Social Security checks or use her Medicaid benefits.


And she lives in Payson, Arizona -- a place that spends a freaking fortune in federal money on forest fire prevention and suppression because they thought it was a good idea to keep selling real estate in the middle of a dry ponderosa pine forest. But people like her don't think about things like this.
 
2014-08-16 04:21:58 PM  
Let's try the lesson, class, despite the fact that you're hungry, which affects your learning potential, whatevs, let's give it a go:

You have nothing to eat because you are poor.  How do you obtain money for food?

a) steal [bootstrappy, but illegal.  incorrect]
b) kill your parents for insurance money [again, bootstrappy, but also illegal. see Menendez bros.  incorrect]
c) borrow money from parents, start a business that is profitable and bank that profit! [partially correct, however, only during Romney presidency]
d) Refuse to eat, because it's better to stay hungry! [correct.  This way you will grow up malnourished and poorly educated and will probably cheer "let him die" upon hearing about people who get sick and don't have health insurance.]
 
2014-08-16 04:23:35 PM  
I'm a liberal and I don't think I support a free school lunch program either.  Of course, I support increased social assistance to struggling parents so they can afford lunches for their kids.  Also, intervention by the school and child services if the children aren't getting enough to eat.  If kids aren't being fed at school, they aren't being fed properly at home, during the weekend or summer.

If the Government is paying social assistance (partly based on the kids you have), it has a right and responsibility to ensure that this is getting to the kids.
 
2014-08-16 04:23:44 PM  
Damn Teabaggers.
 
2014-08-16 04:29:33 PM  
The more I hear teabaggers speak lately the more I think of Martin Bashir's comments regarding Sarah Palin.

I think that what this woman really needs is for some poor school children to hold her down and take a dump in her mouth.  It may not change her mind about anything, but it might help balance the current amount of shiat that's coming out of it.
 
2014-08-16 04:30:17 PM  

mrshowrules: If the Government is paying social assistance (partly based on the kids you have), it has a right and responsibility to ensure that this is getting to the kids.


Isn't the easiest way to do so by having free school lunches?
 
2014-08-16 04:31:51 PM  

mrshowrules: I'm a liberal and I don't think I support a free school lunch program either.  Of course, I support increased social assistance to struggling parents so they can afford lunches for their kids.  Also, intervention by the school and child services if the children aren't getting enough to eat.  If kids aren't being fed at school, they aren't being fed properly at home, during the weekend or summer.

If the Government is paying social assistance (partly based on the kids you have), it has a right and responsibility to ensure that this is getting to the kids.


Logistically it's easier to just give the lunch to the kids than it is to give more money to the parents and then check to make sure they're sending lunches for the kids.

Plus, with the school providing the lunch there's at least the chance the kid might get some vegetables and something vaguely healthy on the plate.
 
2014-08-16 04:34:34 PM  
As someone, who as a kid was on the Federal School Lunch program, and now is a productive, tax-paying member of society (a "53%-er", if you will), the school lunch program works.  Kids can't learn if they're starving. For some kids, it may be the only decent meal they get all day.

Forbidden Doughnut: I'm guessing members of the Tea Party have never been poor themselves, or have selectively forgot they were at one point in their lives....


The Teabaggers are the latter (but see themselves as "Temporarily Embarrassed Millionaires"), the ones who control them are the former.
 
2014-08-16 04:42:11 PM  

dustman81: As someone, who as a kid was on the Federal School Lunch program, and now is a productive, tax-paying member of society (a "53%-er", if you will), the school lunch program works.  Kids can't learn if they're starving. For some kids, it may be the only decent meal they get all day.


Yes, but those kids didn't earn that meal.  They need the dignity of work to mold them into a person that deserves it.
 
2014-08-16 04:42:28 PM  

doyner: She actually suggested a 12-step program to get them off of being addicted to poverty.Just let that little fact sink in.


Clearly they're just addicted too being poor
 
2014-08-16 04:43:12 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: mrshowrules: If the Government is paying social assistance (partly based on the kids you have), it has a right and responsibility to ensure that this is getting to the kids.

Isn't the easiest way to do so by having free school lunches?


I understand the logic but then you end up paying for a whole bunch of kids who didn't need free lunches.  There are kids not getting fed properly on nights/weekends/holidays/summers.  Identifying these few kids in this situation based on them missing lunches or having sub-standard lunches, might be an opportunity to intervene in general and do something more than a bandaid.

We have a milk program in Canada.  Free milk for the kids but the school bills us for it anyways but you can opt out.  Either way, they kid basically get all the milk they can drink during the day.  Basically the whole thing is cost neutral .

Not sure how it works in the US.  At the end of the day, the kids have to be fed no matter what.  First, I'd like to see an approach that doesn't make if obvious to a kid that they are a charity case.  Second, our responsibility to kids goes beyond just the time they are at school.  Third, I don't think kids whose parents can afford to make lunches should get a free ride.  Just my thoughts.
 
2014-08-16 04:47:45 PM  

mrshowrules: I understand the logic but then you end up paying for a whole bunch of kids who didn't need free lunches.  There are kids not getting fed properly on nights/weekends/holidays/summers.  Identifying these few kids in this situation based on them missing lunches or having sub-standard lunches, might be an opportunity to intervene in general and do something more than a bandaid.

We have a milk program in Canada.  Free milk for the kids but the school bills us for it anyways but you can opt out.  Either way, they kid basically get all the milk they can drink during the day.  Basically the whole thing is cost neutral .

Not sure how it works in the US.  At the end of the day, the kids have to be fed no matter what.   First, I'd like to see an approach that doesn't make if obvious to a kid that they are a charity case.  Second, our responsibility to kids goes beyond just the time they are at school.  Third, I don't think kids whose parents can afford to make lunches should get a free ride.  Just my thoughts.


LOLWUT?

I'd rather a few kids that didn't need them get the lunches if it minimizes the risk that the truly needy don't.
 
2014-08-16 04:51:07 PM  
if you've ever been to 12-step, you know that this is enabling

Hi, my name is Fusillade762 and I'm addicted to food.
 
2014-08-16 04:51:17 PM  

mrshowrules: Not sure how it works in the US.  At the end of the day, the kids have to be fed no matter what.  First, I'd like to see an approach that doesn't make if obvious to a kid that they are a charity case.


How does having a  more intrusive system do this?
 
2014-08-16 04:51:24 PM  
God damn I hate tea baggers.
 
2014-08-16 04:53:55 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: mrshowrules: I'm a liberal and I don't think I support a free school lunch program either.  Of course, I support increased social assistance to struggling parents so they can afford lunches for their kids.  Also, intervention by the school and child services if the children aren't getting enough to eat.  If kids aren't being fed at school, they aren't being fed properly at home, during the weekend or summer.

If the Government is paying social assistance (partly based on the kids you have), it has a right and responsibility to ensure that this is getting to the kids.

Logistically it's easier to just give the lunch to the kids than it is to give more money to the parents and then check to make sure they're sending lunches for the kids.

Plus, with the school providing the lunch there's at least the chance the kid might get some vegetables and something vaguely healthy on the plate.


fark you, Moochelle! My kid ain't eatin' no commie socialist vegetables! Or drinkin' water, neither! Deep fried double cheeseburger and a Big Gulp!
 
2014-08-16 04:54:54 PM  

mrshowrules: At the end of the day, the kids have to be fed no matter what.


And at the beginning of the day and in the middle of the day. (Yeah, I know what you meant.)

I taught in a school where 98% of the kids qualified for free and reduced lunch. Average 29-30 kids per class. Teachers have to hound and track down parents to get the required paperwork so the kids can get those lunches. It's a logistical nightmare in the first place. There is no way in hell the teacher can know how every kid in her class is being fed at home. Our public schools have failures stacked on top of failures because our society is broken at a fundamental level -- just look at the subject of this article. She's a selfish cow who already has her needs taken care of. She just chews her cud, takes a shiat, and moves to a different part of the pasture.

Personally, I'd rather see a whole shiat-ton of food get wasted to make sure the ONE kid who really needs it doesn't go hungry.
 
2014-08-16 04:56:18 PM  
Remember that time Christ refused to feed people after a sermon because he didn't want them depending on him?

Yeah me neither.
 
2014-08-16 04:57:55 PM  
Republicans believe that one person voting twice is enough reason to act, but thousands of kids not getting lunch isn't.
 
2014-08-16 04:59:07 PM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: I live here. I may be slowly going insane up here, though. Please don't judge all of us. There are a (very) few people here who aren't actually going out of our way to be assholes and misanthropes.


To be fair, you are right. I used to live in Tempe and spent a fair amount of time mucking about around the Mogollon Rim. I met some really cool people and I absolutely love AZ and NM. I like the more libertarian side of AZ--I lived there when the legislature and governor, all Republican controlled, repealed the sodomy laws on their own. It felt good.
 
2014-08-16 04:59:48 PM  

Somacandra: I lived there when the legislature and governor, all Republican controlled, repealed the sodomy laws on their own. It felt good.


Sodomy always does.
 
2014-08-16 05:00:26 PM  
She doesn't want the feds to steal her Medicare money for social programs.
 
2014-08-16 05:01:43 PM  

mrshowrules: Not sure how it works in the US.  At the end of the day, the kids have to be fed no matter what.  First, I'd like to see an approach that doesn't make if obvious to a kid that they are a charity case.  Second, our responsibility to kids goes beyond just the time they are at school.  Third, I don't think kids whose parents can afford to make lunches should get a free ride.  Just my thoughts.


There are a number of ways a kid can get a free or reduced fee lunch (kid pays .40 for lunch) though the Federal School Lunch program:

Direct Certification: The household can have a member that is on Welfare, Food Stamps or on the SNAP, TANF or FDPIR programs. (One eligible member of the household means all members of the household are eligible).

Community Eligibility: The kid attends a district that has been approved for community eligibility, which means every student in the district gets a free lunch, regardless of household income level. This is available to districts where 40% or more of the students have been directly certified to receive a free/reduced lunch.

Income-based Eligibility: The parent fills out an application stating that they are below a household income level (based on household size) and is approved to received a free/reduced lunch.

http://frac.org/federal-foodnutrition-programs/national-school-lunch -p rogram/eligibility/
 
2014-08-16 05:11:34 PM  
This is likely her frame of reference:

i487.photobucket.com

/GOP blather from the 2012 election
 
2014-08-16 05:17:36 PM  

doyner: mrshowrules: I understand the logic but then you end up paying for a whole bunch of kids who didn't need free lunches.  There are kids not getting fed properly on nights/weekends/holidays/summers.  Identifying these few kids in this situation based on them missing lunches or having sub-standard lunches, might be an opportunity to intervene in general and do something more than a bandaid.

We have a milk program in Canada.  Free milk for the kids but the school bills us for it anyways but you can opt out.  Either way, they kid basically get all the milk they can drink during the day.  Basically the whole thing is cost neutral .

Not sure how it works in the US.  At the end of the day, the kids have to be fed no matter what.   First, I'd like to see an approach that doesn't make if obvious to a kid that they are a charity case.  Second, our responsibility to kids goes beyond just the time they are at school.  Third, I don't think kids whose parents can afford to make lunches should get a free ride.  Just my thoughts.

LOLWUT?

I'd rather a few kids that didn't need them get the lunches if it minimizes the risk that the truly needy don't.


Identify them/intervene behind the scenes rather than in front of their classmates and teachers.
 
2014-08-16 05:20:50 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: mrshowrules: Not sure how it works in the US.  At the end of the day, the kids have to be fed no matter what.  First, I'd like to see an approach that doesn't make if obvious to a kid that they are a charity case.

How does having a  more intrusive system do this?


Something behind the scenes instead of seen by classmates.  I'm not sure how the current programs works.  Can classmates see who is getting the free lunch?  What ever social intervention solution is, I would prefer it involved the kid leaving his home with that lunch like the other kids.  I'm not explaining it well.
 
2014-08-16 05:27:15 PM  

mrshowrules: cameroncrazy1984: mrshowrules: Not sure how it works in the US.  At the end of the day, the kids have to be fed no matter what.  First, I'd like to see an approach that doesn't make if obvious to a kid that they are a charity case.

How does having a  more intrusive system do this?

Something behind the scenes instead of seen by classmates.  I'm not sure how the current programs works.  Can classmates see who is getting the free lunch?  What ever social intervention solution is, I would prefer it involved the kid leaving his home with that lunch like the other kids.  I'm not explaining it well.


When I was on the lunch program, I got a meal ticket. I just handed that ticket to the cashier and they punched it.
 
2014-08-16 05:29:24 PM  

dustman81: mrshowrules: Not sure how it works in the US.  At the end of the day, the kids have to be fed no matter what.  First, I'd like to see an approach that doesn't make if obvious to a kid that they are a charity case.  Second, our responsibility to kids goes beyond just the time they are at school.  Third, I don't think kids whose parents can afford to make lunches should get a free ride.  Just my thoughts.

There are a number of ways a kid can get a free or reduced fee lunch (kid pays .40 for lunch) though the Federal School Lunch program:

Direct Certification: The household can have a member that is on Welfare, Food Stamps or on the SNAP, TANF or FDPIR programs. (One eligible member of the household means all members of the household are eligible).

Community Eligibility: The kid attends a district that has been approved for community eligibility, which means every student in the district gets a free lunch, regardless of household income level. This is available to districts where 40% or more of the students have been directly certified to receive a free/reduced lunch.

Income-based Eligibility: The parent fills out an application stating that they are below a household income level (based on household size) and is approved to received a free/reduced lunch.

http://frac.org/federal-foodnutrition-programs/national-school-lunch -p rogram/eligibility/


Something about it creeps me out about parents not feeding their own kids and we seem to be addressing the symptom of the problem than really solving it.  A parent feeding his kid is one of the most fundamental things in nature.  If a parent is incapable of doing that, there is something various serious going on at the house financially or otherwise.  Not something a country as rich as the US should have going in any significant numbers.

What if the only good meals that kid is getting in a week are the 5 meals he got at school?  The school providing the lunch should be the last resort.  The kid leaving his house with that lunch, should be the primary approach somehow.
 
2014-08-16 05:32:05 PM  
Pfft. When I was a kid, we were poor and I didn't get no free lunch ticket. I brought in a goat from home and butchered it right there at the lunch table. Built character. I also made some extra money on the side washing the gallons of goat blood out of my classmate's clothes.

Less handouts, more goats, and tax cuts for goat blood entrepreneurs.
 
2014-08-16 05:32:23 PM  

dustman81: mrshowrules: cameroncrazy1984: mrshowrules: Not sure how it works in the US.  At the end of the day, the kids have to be fed no matter what.  First, I'd like to see an approach that doesn't make if obvious to a kid that they are a charity case.

How does having a  more intrusive system do this?

Something behind the scenes instead of seen by classmates.  I'm not sure how the current programs works.  Can classmates see who is getting the free lunch?  What ever social intervention solution is, I would prefer it involved the kid leaving his home with that lunch like the other kids.  I'm not explaining it well.

When I was on the lunch program, I got a meal ticket. I just handed that ticket to the cashier and they punched it.


"dustman uses a ticket", "ticket baby", "what's a matter, someone take your ticket".  "why don't you have some confetti for desert ticket ho?"

/children can be nearly as insensitive as farkers
 
2014-08-16 05:46:38 PM  

mrshowrules: dustman81: mrshowrules: Not sure how it works in the US.  At the end of the day, the kids have to be fed no matter what.  First, I'd like to see an approach that doesn't make if obvious to a kid that they are a charity case.  Second, our responsibility to kids goes beyond just the time they are at school.  Third, I don't think kids whose parents can afford to make lunches should get a free ride.  Just my thoughts.

There are a number of ways a kid can get a free or reduced fee lunch (kid pays .40 for lunch) though the Federal School Lunch program:

Direct Certification: The household can have a member that is on Welfare, Food Stamps or on the SNAP, TANF or FDPIR programs. (One eligible member of the household means all members of the household are eligible).

Community Eligibility: The kid attends a district that has been approved for community eligibility, which means every student in the district gets a free lunch, regardless of household income level. This is available to districts where 40% or more of the students have been directly certified to receive a free/reduced lunch.

Income-based Eligibility: The parent fills out an application stating that they are below a household income level (based on household size) and is approved to received a free/reduced lunch.

http://frac.org/federal-foodnutrition-programs/national-school-lunch -p rogram/eligibility/

Something about it creeps me out about parents not feeding their own kids and we seem to be addressing the symptom of the problem than really solving it.  A parent feeding his kid is one of the most fundamental things in nature.  If a parent is incapable of doing that, there is something various serious going on at the house financially or otherwise.  Not something a country as rich as the US should have going in any significant numbers.

What if the only good meals that kid is getting in a week are the 5 meals he got at school?  The school providing the lunch should be the last resort.  The kid leaving his hou ...


Families that qualify for free lunch typically also qualify for SNAP (what food stamps are called now).  So, the parents are given some money to feed themselves and their kids, though the benefit amounts could certainly be improved.

The free lunch program for low income families acts as a supplement for SNAP.  If the school can feed the kid, the parent can stretch the other money further at home.
 
2014-08-16 05:47:03 PM  

dustman81: mrshowrules: cameroncrazy1984: mrshowrules: Not sure how it works in the US.  At the end of the day, the kids have to be fed no matter what.  First, I'd like to see an approach that doesn't make if obvious to a kid that they are a charity case.

How does having a  more intrusive system do this?

Something behind the scenes instead of seen by classmates.  I'm not sure how the current programs works.  Can classmates see who is getting the free lunch?  What ever social intervention solution is, I would prefer it involved the kid leaving his home with that lunch like the other kids.  I'm not explaining it well.

When I was on the lunch program, I got a meal ticket. I just handed that ticket to the cashier and they punched it.


When I was a kid, tickets were used too. If you were buying that day or if you were getting it for free, it was the same ticket. Nowadays, it's all done via computerized credit accounts. Who dumped money into the account may not even be known by the kid using it, much less by other kids.
 
2014-08-16 05:58:22 PM  

vpb: The funny thing is that most of these people think they are good Christians.

I wonder if they have ever even read the bible?


Jesus didn't give away free bread and fishes at the Mount of Olives like some damn dirty hippy liberal. He sold the loaves and fishes to Wal-Bazaar at 150% markup, and charged everyone at the sermon a 1000 shekel-per-person campaign donation fee.
 
2014-08-16 05:58:51 PM  

Forbidden Doughnut: I'm guessing members of the Tea Party have never been poor themselves, or have selectively forgot they were at one point in their lives....


Considering how many Medicaid-funded mobility scooters and people with enough free time to go to a Tea Party rally at 1 P.M. on a Wednesday, I'd say a lot of Tea Party members are poor, but they see themselves as just temporarily embarrassed millionaires. They'll vote against their own self interests and their children's self-interests, as long as it assures that "those people" aren't getting something.
 
Displayed 50 of 210 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report