• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans block child nutrition bill

j-mac said:
Whew! Join the club....My dollar doesn't go as far either.

The average allotment is $133.00 per person. In a family of four that is $532 per month. Now, I don't know about you, but I only spend about that in my family per month.

j-mac
Click to expand...

At kleast that. Do you pay for school lunches on top of that or do they brown bag?
 
Barbbtx said:
It can be done on a local level. Do we really need to pass huge big government bills to make sure our neighborhood children have healthy meals? How much freedom are we willing to give up to receive "goodies" from the government?
Click to expand...

Nnot sure I carwe whether local or federal government does it. Nor do I see how either doing it is losing any freedoms. So, I don't really follow you here.
 
Boo Radley said:
At kleast that. Do you pay for school lunches on top of that or do they brown bag?
Click to expand...

We paid for the lunches some days, and BB'd others...depends. We liked to keep the variety going.


j-mac
 
Boo Radley said:
Nnot sure I carwe whether local or federal government does it. Nor do I see how either doing it is losing any freedoms. So, I don't really follow you here.
Click to expand...

the freedom loss is when they dictate what it is your children can eat. I remember a story of a kid told that he couldn't have his lunch he brought from home because it contained certain banned foods...That goes too far.

j-mac
 
First lady Michelle Obama has lobbied for the bill as part of her "Let's Move" campaign to combat childhood obesity.
Click to expand...

I think their are many others involved in this "Let's Move" campaign, especially regarding the Obamas.
 
j-mac said:
the freedom loss is when they dictate what it is your children can eat. I remember a story of a kid told that he couldn't have his lunch he brought from home because it contained certain banned foods...That goes too far.

j-mac
Click to expand...

They're not doing that. The dictated would be what schools can fix with our money. You're free to feed them whatever you want. There is a real difference here.
 
j-mac said:
We paid for the lunches some days, and BB'd others...depends. We liked to keep the variety going.


j-mac
Click to expand...

And when you pay, that adds to your cost. Right?
 
Boo Radley said:
They're not doing that. The dictated would be what schools can fix with our money. You're free to feed them whatever you want. There is a real difference here.
Click to expand...


You can blindly trust all you wish....Why do you expect other to do that though?


j-mac
 
Boo Radley said:
And when you pay, that adds to your cost. Right?
Click to expand...

Maybe a little, but on those occasions that we pay, we don't have to prepare the food at home, so we save there. Your point?

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Maybe a little, but on those occasions that we pay, we don't have to prepare the food at home, so we save there. Your point?

j-mac
Click to expand...

The point is an easy one. People on food stamps have to either brown bag, or come up with money for the hot meal. If they're on food stamps, they are unlikely to able to spring the the cost of the hot meal.
 
Boo Radley said:
The point is an easy one. People on food stamps have to either brown bag, or come up with money for the hot meal. If they're on food stamps, they are unlikely to able to spring the the cost of the hot meal.
Click to expand...


Not true. Those on food stamps likely qualify for free lunches.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Not true. Those on food stamps likely qualify for free lunches.

j-mac
Click to expand...


those on food stamps already qualifiy for free lunches. why expand the program to include yet more people?
 
j-mac said:
Not true. Those on food stamps likely qualify for free lunches.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Exactly. Which is what started this. The claim that they shouldn't have free lunches because they got food stamps. That we were paying twice. :coffeepap
 
OscarB63 said:
those on food stamps already qualifiy for free lunches. why expand the program to include yet more people?
Click to expand...

Because maybe more people could use the help. Even if it is the parents fault, there are places where kids are not being fed well. We can ignore that. That's a perfectly fine option. Or we can help, which is also a perfectly fine option IMHO.
 
Boo Radley said:
Because maybe more people could use the help. Even if it is the parents fault, there are places where kids are not being fed well. We can ignore that. That's a perfectly fine option. Or we can help, which is also a perfectly fine option IMHO.
Click to expand...

and we slowly and surely approach the liberal's wet dream. an ever shrinking pool of evil rich bastards paying outrageously high taxes to support an ever growing pool of people who need help.

I just hope I die before we reach the tipping point where there are more people sucking on the govt tit, than there is tit to suck.
 
Last edited:
Boo Radley said:
Because maybe more people could use the help. Even if it is the parents fault, there are places where kids are not being fed well. We can ignore that. That's a perfectly fine option. Or we can help, which is also a perfectly fine option IMHO.
Click to expand...


You really don't help by making more people dependent on the government.


j-mac
 
OscarB63 said:
and we slowly and surely approach the liberal's wet dream. an ever shrinking pool of evil rich bastards paying outrageously high taxes to support and ever growing pool of people who need help.

I just hope I die before we reach the tipping point where there are more people sucking on the govt tit, than there is tit to suck.
Click to expand...

I don't really know how to respond to that nonsense. I really don't. It is not such a bad thing to help were we can. And government is a perfectly legitimate tool to use to that. It is a far better use of the tax dollar than helping corroprations or fighting needless wars IMHO.
 
j-mac said:
You really don't help by making more people dependent on the government.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Didn't say anything about making them dependent. I said something about giving some kids a regular meal.
 
Objective Voice said:
BINGO! And might I add for once a Conservative spoke the truth on the underhandedness within the GOP (in this case anyway). The amendment was added on purpose for a specific purpose - TO BLOCK THE BILL FROM BEING PASSED...a bill that was voted unamiously in favor of by the Senate BEFORE the amendment was added!!!

Finally, someone within the Republican party took the blinders off and saw things for what they truly are. My hat goes off to you, jamesrage.

(Sorry...I know I said I'd hold off on my response, but once I notied that a Conservative made the connection, there really was no reason to delay.)
Click to expand...
I recognize it as a tactic and nothing more. I do not mind republicans opposing the bill. I just think it is foolish to try to make it appear as though it is just democrats being opposed to doing back ground checks as for why the bill would fail, of course this probably just the republicans paying the democrats back for trying to make them look like monsters who hate children for opposing the bill.
 
American said:
Why does the white house have to put salad bars in schools, can't the school districts think for themselves? Why does the govt have to mandate and fund local food networks, can't the schools buy local products themselves? Are the schools so ****ing stupid that they can't come up with better ideas on their own? Then why are they allowed to teach our children?
Click to expand...

Because that's the Liberal Democrat's idea of trying to solve any kind of problem. Spending replaces the idea of being creative or using their brains. Wait... what brains??? they don't have any. :lamo
 
OscarB63 said:
I fail to see how it is a bad thing to expect people to help themselves
Click to expand...

Not sure it is. But I'm not sure I would leave children to suffer for their parent's failings.
 
OscarB63 said:
I fail to see how it is a bad thing to expect people to help themselves
Click to expand...

It's a bad thing if you are a liberal. Liberals as you know want everything free from the government and as much help as possible so they can sit on their arses and do nothing but sponging off the government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom