215 points

When I was a real little kid, summer was always a hard time for me to eat because I was cut off from the subsidized lunch program. My mother was severely mentally ill and barely provided a meal a day sometimes. Food stamps, subsidized lunch programs and food shelves provided most of my nutrition, it was a benefit she couldn’t divert away from feeding me and my siblings most of the time.

Anybody who supports removing these programs is legitimately a monster. It keeps so many kids alive or from developing horrific nutritional deficiencies. It has nothing but a positive impact on the community and economy.

permalink
report
reply
195 points

Remember folks, the cruelty is the point.

https://www.npr.org/2021/07/08/1014208767/trumps-america-and-why-the-cruelty-is-the-point

Most of the time, you are not looking at someone who believes it’s for the best that food programs are cuts.

You are looking at someone who is prepared to do that, to activate their base.

permalink
report
reply
18 points

I was wondering about this, like deep down inside does she really believe that this is the path to a better world? Doubtful.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points
*

They don’t believe in making a better world overall. They believe in making a better world for themselves.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

a dollar wasted on the homeless, on the starving, on the disadvantaged is a dollar wasted, that could have instead been a dollar given to the billionaires that own the Republicans and their party.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

They don’t even want to make a better world for themselves. They are only concerned with making a worse world for people they don’t like. They are fine being collateral damage in that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
124 points

Children should just fucking starve. They should think twice about being born poor.

THIS IS LITERALLY WHAT REPUBLICANS SAY. WHAT THEY THINK. THEY DON’T EVEN TRY TO HIDE IT. THIS IS A ACTUAL TALKING POINT

permalink
report
reply
57 points

She literally said there’s too many obese kids, so we shouldn’t feed them with welfare.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points
*

Kids are too fat. Don’t feed them ever again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

If you prune their roots and little branches then you can keep them small. Also using wire to shape them can create a more interesting character.

I’m pretty sure that’s how it works.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

GOP presents: intermittent fasting

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

And some kids are fat because they go through periods of eating nothing but junk food to period of food insecurity, so they still aren’t getting enough to eat and they live in a food desert.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Some kids are too fat. Therefore starving kids should just starve.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Kids ARE fat because the poor feed their families the cheapest foods available which are high carb foods that make them crave even more high carb foods.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

They should think twice about being born poor.

Yeah! If you don’t have enough money to support a child, just abo- wait…

permalink
report
parent
reply
70 points
*

She literally got up and argued that she hates the program that allows poor people to chose their own food and wants a programs where the state chooses food for you.

Small government my ass.

permalink
report
reply
44 points

Worse than that: she said that Iowa will not help feed starving children because other children in the entire rest of the country are fat.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

We need more children on deaths door via starvation to bring the national average down! #republicanlogic

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

For 40 dollars a month. This isn’t some kind of program that needed major reformation. It’s literally hanging by half a thread and she’s hitting it with a baseball bat.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Small government They mean “rule by Republicans”

permalink
report
parent
reply
62 points

40 fucking dollars per month per kid. That might pay for a month’s worth of rice but isn’t a week’s worth for fruits, vegetables, and protein!

permalink
report
reply
48 points

For sure… But $0 a month isn’t going to buy much protein either

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Right. We should be offering way more than $40 a month per kid and the fact that republicans want to cut what is basically a pittance shows how cruel they are.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It’d be added to the other EBT they likely get. It’s only supposed to cover school lunches I’m guessing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-16 points

A month’s worth of rice would actually be a pretty smart choice for the money. Unfortunately that’s not how that pittance will be spent.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Do you think children can get all the necessary nutrition from rice?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Yeah it’d be ideal if all of them had perfectly cooked and prepared meals with well researched nutritional balance and a balanced food and flavor profile.

But somehow Republicans want small government that leaves people alone except when it comes to their genitals, bathroom habits, access to books, or apparently what kind of food they get.

I guess we can continue to judge the poorest among us for what we view as poor choices with their social benefits.

I’m not even against some of the ideas, but denying people what they have because it’s not your perfect idea of what they should have is just cruel. Work towards better, don’t use people’s suffering as leverage.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

potatoes would probably be a better choice nutritionally (with the obvious instruction you can’t just fry them all)

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 476K

    Comments