Democrats want to give school kids 3 meals a day YEAR ROUND!!!

[Camp]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

He said hungry not starving

The difference is?
Do try to stay on point. Getting into semantics to strengthen your argument is never successful.

The difference between hungry and starving is not semantics. They are two completely different things.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

Child obesity does not indicate the absence of starvation. Marasmus starvation is the visible type of starvation. It is caused by the lack of calories of any type and creates the super skinny visions that we are used to seeing in starvation cases. Kwashiortyor starvation is the lack of nutrients that cause organ breakdowns and a slower less identifiable starvation. Both are fatal.

Oh please. None of which exists here in the US....
Cut the crap.
Feel free to write a check though. Or buy the food yourself.
In a typical community, property owners are spending about 15% of their net household income on taxes which go directly to public education.....How much more do you want? 30%? 50%? 75%?......Where does it end?
And don't give this shit about "investing in our kid's future"....
Why are you not looking to parental responsibility?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Could be. I am a reading/language arts teacher....not math, lol.

Which means you're a welfare bum yourself since you're paid for a job that has no social value.. We should only teach STEM in school. THINK

ONLY STEM? Hell I thought the US had enough psychopaths, you want to get rid of humanities? lol


Gawd you are weak Bubs

Humanities...Social engineering.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Since 2001, the country has lost 42,400 factories, including 36 percent of factories that employ more than 1,000 workers (which declined from 1,479 to 947), and 38 percent of factories that employ between 500 and 999 employees (from 3,198 to 1,972). An additional 90,000 manufacturing companies are now at risk of going out of business.


Long before the banking collapse of 2008, such important U.S. industries as machine tools, consumer electronics, auto parts, appliances, furniture, telecommunications equipment, and many others that had once dominated the global marketplace suffered their own economic collapse. Manufacturing employment dropped to 11.7 million in October 2009, a loss of 5.5 million or 32 percent of all manufacturing jobs since October 2000. The last time fewer than 12 million people worked in the manufacturing sector was in 1941. In October 2009, more people were officially unemployed (15.7 million) than were working in manufacturing.



But American companies have difficulty competing against foreign countries that undervalue their currencies, pay health care for their workers; provide subsidies for energy, land, buildings, and equipment; grant tax holidays and rebates and provide zero-interest financing; pay their workers poverty wages that would be illegal in the United States, and don't enforce safety or environmental regulations.

Proponents of free trade and outsourcing argue that the United States remains the largest manufacturing economy in the world. Yet, total manufacturing gross domestic product in 2008 (at $1.64 trillion) represented 11.5 percent of U.S. economic output, down from 17 percent in 1999, and 28 percent in 1959. As for our balance of trade, U.S. imports of goods totaled $2.52 trillion in 2008, while exports came to $1.29 trillion -- creating a goods deficit of $821 billion. Those imported goods represented 17.6 percent of U.S. GDP. The U.S. trade deficit in goods and services in 2008 stood at $700 billion -- or more than $2,000 for every American.

Damn that Guido and Mikey!



The Plight of American Manufacturing

And the ceo's that cut the most jobs got the biggest bonus'. Yes, tax them more.

Do you know what the tax rate is on a "bonus check"?

It's considered "Luxury Tax".
The government gets 1/3 of it

Weird, MOST CEO's top exec's get stock options, taxed at Cap gains rate, 20% today



EFFECTIVE RATES

My brother is a VP and he has so much money he doesn't know what to do with it. And he's just a VP. He doesn't make $1 million a year yet he is rich beyond any of these right wingers could dream of being and I swear it would bother poor Republican usmb members more than it would him.

Could be. I am a reading/language arts teacher....not math, lol.

Which means you're a welfare bum yourself since you're paid for a job that has no social value.. We should only teach STEM in school. THINK

Eat crap.

Language arts has no social value ?

I hope to tell you it has value.

Are you teaching grammar, spelling, sentence construction, proper use of adjectives, verbs, pronouns and prepositions?....If what used to be called "English", now language arts is the curriculum of today, I can tell you this...It ain't gettin it( used to illustrate an absurdity)....
My biggest pet peeve is the use of a preposition to end a sentence.
For example......."where you at?....."there is nothing I can think of".....Two generations of people butchering the English language. I even find this nonsense in newspapers and in scripts used in TV news broadcasts.

 

[rightwinger]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

He said hungry not starving

The difference is?
Do try to stay on point. Getting into semantics to strengthen your argument is never successful.

You don't understand the difference?

Starving means hunger to the point of medical impact
Hungry means your neglectful parents send you to school without having eaten. Having the school give you something to eat before you are expected to learn makes alot of sense

 

[thereisnospoon]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

Your hyperbole is noted. No one said starving.

Difference without a distinction. Did you come here to engage in semantics?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

He said hungry not starving

The difference is?
Do try to stay on point. Getting into semantics to strengthen your argument is never successful.

You don't understand the difference?

Starving means hunger to the point of medical impact
Hungry means your neglectful parents send you to school without having eaten. Having the school give you something to eat before you are expected to learn makes alot of sense

This is Camp's post.....Child obesity does not indicate the absence of starvation. Marasmus starvation is the visible type of starvation. It is caused by the lack of calories of any type and creates the super skinny visions that we are used to seeing in starvation cases. Kwashiortyor starvation is the lack of nutrients that cause organ breakdowns and a slower less identifiable starvation. Both are fatal.
Go bitch at that poster.

 

[sear]

"My biggest pet peeve is the use of a preposition to end a sentence. " ts #764

Pet peeve perhaps.
I've heard some grammarians condemn it.
But I know of no rule that forbids it, in either British English, or U.S. English.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

He said hungry not starving

The difference is?
Do try to stay on point. Getting into semantics to strengthen your argument is never successful.

The difference between hungry and starving is not semantics. They are two completely different things.

Asclipeas stated that starvation is medical impact....You posted examples of hunger/malnutrition that result in medical impact. Asclipeas defined this as "starvation"...
Your problem is with asclipeas.

 

[Asclepias]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

Your hyperbole is noted. No one said starving.

Difference without a distinction. Did you come here to engage in semantics?

Absolutely not. I also didnt come in here to deal with emotional appeals instead of facts. Thats why I called you on your hyperbole.

 

[thereisnospoon]

"My biggest pet peeve is the use of a preposition to end a sentence. " ts #764

Pet peeve perhaps.
I've heard some grammarians condemn it.
But I know of no rule that forbids it, in either British English, or U.S. English.

Use of prepositions to end sentences is NOT proper grammar. Period.

 

[Camp]

What kind of ideology would be against the practicality of feeding school children three meals per day? Certainly not conservatives who have traditionally included pragmatism in their ideology. Most of the folks claiming to be conservatives today will not even know what pragmatism means. For them, we might need to define it. It means being practical and following courses of action that are practical. Getting a maximum return on an investment is practical.
Endless studies and research have proven beyond any doubt that children who are well fed with nutritious foods are far more receptible to learning than those who are poorly nourished or worse, hungry. The government and tax payers invest large amounts of funding to educate children. Making sure the ability of these children to advance and prosper due to this investment is maximized makes good business and investment sense.
The practice of feeding school children does not have to be viewed as good or bad, it needs to be viewed as smart or to not do so, a foolish waste of an investment.

Ok..Here's a homework assignment for you...Since you used the term "practicality", devise a plan to not only provide food for every kid across the country three squares a day, the facilities to prepare the food, the workers ( who must be paid) to serve the food, the equipment, the space, and all of the other ancillary items that would go into making this work. Then provide a cost analysis for same. Knock yourself out.
You libs see a way to increase dependency on government and you become bulls in a China sop trying to get it done. You eschew any notion of unintended consequences, any fiscal fallout. And how this will effect the people involved.
So go ahead. Explain how this will work.
This ought to be good.
BTW, why are you not forking over some of YOUR money to your local schools to get this off the ground? Why does this have to involve a money grab?

I do not need a homework assignment thank you. Practicality tells us that the system is already in place. It is already used to feed school kids two meals per day. What is being proposed is that a third meal be served before the child leaves the school and returns home. Your rant is just bluster over serving an extra meal to children while they are at school. Maybe the school you went to didn't have a cafeteria and serve lunches everyday. All the schools today have them and they have been serving morning breakfast meals for several decades.

 

[Asclepias]

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

He said hungry not starving

The difference is?
Do try to stay on point. Getting into semantics to strengthen your argument is never successful.

The difference between hungry and starving is not semantics. They are two completely different things.

Asclipeas stated that starvation is medical impact....You posted examples of hunger/malnutrition that result in medical impact. Asclipeas defined this as "starvation"...
Your problem is with asclipeas.

Youre confused. I stated no such thing. You are just upset you got excited and said something he didnt mention.

 

[rightwinger]

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

He said hungry not starving

The difference is?
Do try to stay on point. Getting into semantics to strengthen your argument is never successful.

You don't understand the difference?

Starving means hunger to the point of medical impact
Hungry means your neglectful parents send you to school without having eaten. Having the school give you something to eat before you are expected to learn makes alot of sense

This is Camp's post.....Child obesity does not indicate the absence of starvation. Marasmus starvation is the visible type of starvation. It is caused by the lack of calories of any type and creates the super skinny visions that we are used to seeing in starvation cases. Kwashiortyor starvation is the lack of nutrients that cause organ breakdowns and a slower less identifiable starvation. Both are fatal.
Go bitch at that poster.

Seems like Michelle Obama is right in wanting schools to serve more nutritious meals

 

[easyt65]

"Democrats want to give school kids 3 meals a day YEAR ROUND!!!"

Liberal Progressives, ie 'Socialists', want to 'give' away LOTS of things for 'free'...as long as THEY do not have to pay for it. The truth about Socialism, as nearly every nation that has ever adopted it and ended up collapsing found out, is that Socialism is GREAT...until you run out of OTHER PEOPLES' money!

Liberals love to talk about how the GOVERNMENT is going to 'pay for it'. The government CAN'T pay for anything. The government doesn't make any money. The government SEIZES money from tax payers - that is how the government 'makes' money and has money to pay for the cr@p it spends money on.

Unlike the LIES Obama told when peddling his Obamacare, no government has EVER created a massive entitlement / spending program that has ever cost NOTHING. No government has EVER created a massive entitlement program that 'paid for itself'.

The nation is TRILLIONS in debt because our budget is created and controlled by a bunch of lawyers / greedy self/party-serving politicians all with one goal in common - to be re-elected. They are supported by Special Interest groups who share that goal - to get them re-elected for what they will get out of it. There is not 1 CPA that looks over the budget and ensures it is efficient and not over budget (how much we collect in taxes). In fact, our politicians have allowed it to be OK for us to spend more than we take in...although none of us could survive or operate our expenses that way.

Despite being trillion in debt, for example, Liberals passed the horrendous Obama Stimulus Plan ,a bill that cost nearly a TRILLION dollars and contained over 7,000 pieces of self-serving DNC-Only PORK. In the end it cost tax payers over $742,000 PER JOB reportedly 'created / saved', and those final numbers were doctored to look better than they were. (One company reported that Obama claimed to have saved more jobs at their company than actual people who worked there.)

'GIVING' people something, 'but not enough to really make a difference', has been Liberal Standard Operating Procedure for decades, resulting in the creation of a class of 'economic slaves' completely dependent on those programs to survive, guaranteeing they will continue to vote for the party that keeps those programs fully funded and coming.

LBJ, for example, was the architect and founder of 'economic slavery'. Liberals opposed Civil Rights, and when it passed they were scared shi'iteless of blacks' growing power. The KKK had failed to 'keep them in their place, so they had to come up with another way to control them. LBJ was quoted as saying:
- "These uppity negroes now have something they have never had before - power to back their movement. We have to give them something, BUT NOT ENOUGH TO MATTER. I will have these ni@@ers voting Democrat for the next 200 years."

LBJ and Democrats conned the blacks into surrendering their new-found freedom and power to the Democrats in exchange for welfare, food stamps, free gub'ment cheese, Obamaphones...the scraps that fell from the elitist Democrat 'massahs' table. Since the passage of Civil Rights, their loyalty to the Democrats have resulted in almost NO progress at all, arguably even a step back. Unemployment for young blacks - even after 7 years of having a black President - is DOUBLE that of whites. Poverty, deserted / abandoned cities, crime, drugs.... is the legacy Liberals have provided for blacks, ensuring they remain 'economic slaves'. And every election year Liberals engage in fear-mongering, telling blacks that the GOP is going to take away all their welfare, food stamps, ABORTIONS, and other social programs so they had better vote for the Democrats.

Not to worry...the GOVERNMENT / Socialists will pay for it all...with OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY....until it runs out and the US collapses the same way EVERY other country that has embraced Socialism has done. It's all good until they run out of other people's money...

 

[Camp]

"Democrats want to give school kids 3 meals a day YEAR ROUND!!!"

Liberal Progressives, ie 'Socialists', want to 'give' away LOTS of things for 'free'...as long as THEY do not have to pay for it. The truth about Socialism, as nearly every nation that has ever adopted it and ended up collapsing found out, is that Socialism is GREAT...until you run out of OTHER PEOPLES' money!

Liberals love to talk about how the GOVERNMENT is going to 'pay for it'. The government CAN'T pay for anything. The government doesn't make any money. The government SEIZES money from tax payers - that is how the government 'makes' money and has money to pay for the cr@p it spends money on.

Unlike the LIES Obama told when peddling his Obamacare, no government has EVER created a massive entitlement / spending program that has ever cost NOTHING. No government has EVER created a massive entitlement program that 'paid for itself'.

The nation is TRILLIONS in debt because our budget is created and controlled by a bunch of lawyers / greedy self/party-serving politicians all with one goal in common - to be re-elected. They are supported by Special Interest groups who share that goal - to get them re-elected for what they will get out of it. There is not 1 CPA that looks over the budget and ensures it is efficient and not over budget (how much we collect in taxes). In fact, our politicians have allowed it to be OK for us to spend more than we take in...although none of us could survive or operate our expenses that way.

Despite being trillion in debt, for example, Liberals passed the horrendous Obama Stimulus Plan ,a bill that cost nearly a TRILLION dollars and contained over 7,000 pieces of self-serving DNC-Only PORK. In the end it cost tax payers over $742,000 PER JOB reportedly 'created / saved', and those final numbers were doctored to look better than they were. (One company reported that Obama claimed to have saved more jobs at their company than actual people who worked there.)

'GIVING' people something, 'but not enough to really make a difference', has been Liberal Standard Operating Procedure for decades, resulting in the creation of a class of 'economic slaves' completely dependent on those programs to survive, guaranteeing they will continue to vote for the party that keeps those programs fully funded and coming.

LBJ, for example, was the architect and founder of 'economic slavery'. Liberals opposed Civil Rights, and when it passed they were scared shi'iteless of blacks' growing power. The KKK had failed to 'keep them in their place, so they had to come up with another way to control them. LBJ was quoted as saying:
- "These uppity negroes now have something they have never had before - power to back their movement. We have to give them something, BUT NOT ENOUGH TO MATTER. I will have these ni@@ers voting Democrat for the next 200 years."

LBJ and Democrats conned the blacks into surrendering their new-found freedom and power to the Democrats in exchange for welfare, food stamps, free gub'ment cheese, Obamaphones...the scraps that fell from the elitist Democrat 'massahs' table. Since the passage of Civil Rights, their loyalty to the Democrats have resulted in almost NO progress at all, arguably even a step back. Unemployment for young blacks - even after 7 years of having a black President - is DOUBLE that of whites. Poverty, deserted / abandoned cities, crime, drugs.... is the legacy Liberals have provided for blacks, ensuring they remain 'economic slaves'. And every election year Liberals engage in fear-mongering, telling blacks that the GOP is going to take away all their welfare, food stamps, ABORTIONS, and other social programs so they had better vote for the Democrats.

Not to worry...the GOVERNMENT / Socialists will pay for it all...with OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY....until it runs out and the US collapses the same way EVERY other country that has embraced Socialism has done. It's all good until they run out of other people's money...

All of that just to get out of giving kids a piece of fish or chicken, a stalk of broccoli, a spoon of mashed potatoes, a wedge of lettuce and an apple before they go home from school. God forbid we think about giving them a piece of cake.

 

[Asclepias]

"Democrats want to give school kids 3 meals a day YEAR ROUND!!!"

Liberal Progressives, ie 'Socialists', want to 'give' away LOTS of things for 'free'...as long as THEY do not have to pay for it. The truth about Socialism, as nearly every nation that has ever adopted it and ended up collapsing found out, is that Socialism is GREAT...until you run out of OTHER PEOPLES' money!

Liberals love to talk about how the GOVERNMENT is going to 'pay for it'. The government CAN'T pay for anything. The government doesn't make any money. The government SEIZES money from tax payers - that is how the government 'makes' money and has money to pay for the cr@p it spends money on.

Unlike the LIES Obama told when peddling his Obamacare, no government has EVER created a massive entitlement / spending program that has ever cost NOTHING. No government has EVER created a massive entitlement program that 'paid for itself'.

The nation is TRILLIONS in debt because our budget is created and controlled by a bunch of lawyers / greedy self/party-serving politicians all with one goal in common - to be re-elected. They are supported by Special Interest groups who share that goal - to get them re-elected for what they will get out of it. There is not 1 CPA that looks over the budget and ensures it is efficient and not over budget (how much we collect in taxes). In fact, our politicians have allowed it to be OK for us to spend more than we take in...although none of us could survive or operate our expenses that way.

Despite being trillion in debt, for example, Liberals passed the horrendous Obama Stimulus Plan ,a bill that cost nearly a TRILLION dollars and contained over 7,000 pieces of self-serving DNC-Only PORK. In the end it cost tax payers over $742,000 PER JOB reportedly 'created / saved', and those final numbers were doctored to look better than they were. (One company reported that Obama claimed to have saved more jobs at their company than actual people who worked there.)

'GIVING' people something, 'but not enough to really make a difference', has been Liberal Standard Operating Procedure for decades, resulting in the creation of a class of 'economic slaves' completely dependent on those programs to survive, guaranteeing they will continue to vote for the party that keeps those programs fully funded and coming.

LBJ, for example, was the architect and founder of 'economic slavery'. Liberals opposed Civil Rights, and when it passed they were scared shi'iteless of blacks' growing power. The KKK had failed to 'keep them in their place, so they had to come up with another way to control them. LBJ was quoted as saying:
- "These uppity negroes now have something they have never had before - power to back their movement. We have to give them something, BUT NOT ENOUGH TO MATTER. I will have these ni@@ers voting Democrat for the next 200 years."

LBJ and Democrats conned the blacks into surrendering their new-found freedom and power to the Democrats in exchange for welfare, food stamps, free gub'ment cheese, Obamaphones...the scraps that fell from the elitist Democrat 'massahs' table. Since the passage of Civil Rights, their loyalty to the Democrats have resulted in almost NO progress at all, arguably even a step back. Unemployment for young blacks - even after 7 years of having a black President - is DOUBLE that of whites. Poverty, deserted / abandoned cities, crime, drugs.... is the legacy Liberals have provided for blacks, ensuring they remain 'economic slaves'. And every election year Liberals engage in fear-mongering, telling blacks that the GOP is going to take away all their welfare, food stamps, ABORTIONS, and other social programs so they had better vote for the Democrats.

Not to worry...the GOVERNMENT / Socialists will pay for it all...with OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY....until it runs out and the US collapses the same way EVERY other country that has embraced Socialism has done. It's all good until they run out of other people's money...

Its easy to spot the retards. They start posting long overly dramatic posts that no one with any sense reads all the way through.

 

[rightwinger]

"Democrats want to give school kids 3 meals a day YEAR ROUND!!!"

Liberal Progressives, ie 'Socialists', want to 'give' away LOTS of things for 'free'...as long as THEY do not have to pay for it. The truth about Socialism, as nearly every nation that has ever adopted it and ended up collapsing found out, is that Socialism is GREAT...until you run out of OTHER PEOPLES' money!

Liberals love to talk about how the GOVERNMENT is going to 'pay for it'. The government CAN'T pay for anything. The government doesn't make any money. The government SEIZES money from tax payers - that is how the government 'makes' money and has money to pay for the cr@p it spends money on.

Unlike the LIES Obama told when peddling his Obamacare, no government has EVER created a massive entitlement / spending program that has ever cost NOTHING. No government has EVER created a massive entitlement program that 'paid for itself'.

The nation is TRILLIONS in debt because our budget is created and controlled by a bunch of lawyers / greedy self/party-serving politicians all with one goal in common - to be re-elected. They are supported by Special Interest groups who share that goal - to get them re-elected for what they will get out of it. There is not 1 CPA that looks over the budget and ensures it is efficient and not over budget (how much we collect in taxes). In fact, our politicians have allowed it to be OK for us to spend more than we take in...although none of us could survive or operate our expenses that way.

Despite being trillion in debt, for example, Liberals passed the horrendous Obama Stimulus Plan ,a bill that cost nearly a TRILLION dollars and contained over 7,000 pieces of self-serving DNC-Only PORK. In the end it cost tax payers over $742,000 PER JOB reportedly 'created / saved', and those final numbers were doctored to look better than they were. (One company reported that Obama claimed to have saved more jobs at their company than actual people who worked there.)

'GIVING' people something, 'but not enough to really make a difference', has been Liberal Standard Operating Procedure for decades, resulting in the creation of a class of 'economic slaves' completely dependent on those programs to survive, guaranteeing they will continue to vote for the party that keeps those programs fully funded and coming.

LBJ, for example, was the architect and founder of 'economic slavery'. Liberals opposed Civil Rights, and when it passed they were scared shi'iteless of blacks' growing power. The KKK had failed to 'keep them in their place, so they had to come up with another way to control them. LBJ was quoted as saying:
- "These uppity negroes now have something they have never had before - power to back their movement. We have to give them something, BUT NOT ENOUGH TO MATTER. I will have these ni@@ers voting Democrat for the next 200 years."

LBJ and Democrats conned the blacks into surrendering their new-found freedom and power to the Democrats in exchange for welfare, food stamps, free gub'ment cheese, Obamaphones...the scraps that fell from the elitist Democrat 'massahs' table. Since the passage of Civil Rights, their loyalty to the Democrats have resulted in almost NO progress at all, arguably even a step back. Unemployment for young blacks - even after 7 years of having a black President - is DOUBLE that of whites. Poverty, deserted / abandoned cities, crime, drugs.... is the legacy Liberals have provided for blacks, ensuring they remain 'economic slaves'. And every election year Liberals engage in fear-mongering, telling blacks that the GOP is going to take away all their welfare, food stamps, ABORTIONS, and other social programs so they had better vote for the Democrats.

Not to worry...the GOVERNMENT / Socialists will pay for it all...with OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY....until it runs out and the US collapses the same way EVERY other country that has embraced Socialism has done. It's all good until they run out of other people's money...

More...Poor people do not suffer enough from the right

 

[easyt65]

Seems like Michelle Obama is right in wanting schools to serve more nutritious meals

There are more Americans out of work now (approx. 94 MILLION) than any other time in our nation's history...yet Obama recently granted ILLEGAL alien workers the right to compete with those out-of-work Americans for jobs here in the US (even though existing Immigration law made it illegal for Illegals to get jobs in the US).

The black unemployment rate is double that of whites.

...yet Obama continues to bring in thousands of illegals into the US, even teaching them how to sign up for Welfare, food stamps, etc...

There are more people on Food Stamps in this country than at almost any time in this nations history...welfare and other program numbers are in record highs...

Despite vowing not to abandon cities like Detroit, they were left to collapse and are now partially deserted.

Instead of continuing to ramp up our efforts to addict more and more people on Government hand-outs, making them dependent on the government, why don't we work to make them more INDEPENDENT, SELF-SUFFICIENT? WHY don't we try harder to create jobs (and I am not talking about the phony B$ Stimulus Bill that cost nearly a trillion dollars, contained over 7,000 pieces of pork, and ended up costing $742,000 PER JOB created!) Why isn't the 1st black President doing ANYTING for blacks who are suffering such high unemployment numbers, poverty, etc?

Instead of continuing to push LBJ's policy of ECONOMIC SLAVERY why isn't Obama / this government trying to make Americans more independent and successful instead? Oh yeah - the same reason LBJ came up with the idea and the same reason Liberals continue to use it - to ensure votes and that they remain in office.
A successful, independent voter doesn't NEED the government as much as a poor, broke, dependent voter down on his / her knees begging or a handout!

 

[Camp]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

Child obesity does not indicate the absence of starvation. Marasmus starvation is the visible type of starvation. It is caused by the lack of calories of any type and creates the super skinny visions that we are used to seeing in starvation cases. Kwashiortyor starvation is the lack of nutrients that cause organ breakdowns and a slower less identifiable starvation. Both are fatal.

Oh please. None of which exists here in the US....
Cut the crap.
Feel free to write a check though. Or buy the food yourself.
In a typical community, property owners are spending about 15% of their net household income on taxes which go directly to public education.....How much more do you want? 30%? 50%? 75%?......Where does it end?
And don't give this shit about "investing in our kid's future"....
Why are you not looking to parental responsibility?

It does occur here is the USA and fools like you cause it. It cost us huge amounts of money spent on treating sick children who get sick from not getting proper nutrition. It can cost tens of thousands of dollars, even hundreds of thousands of dollars when a child shows up at an emergency room with an illness caused by a kwashiortyor starvation caused illness. This can be anything from pneumonia to kidney failure.