Search
Home  |   About  |   Q & A  |   Archives  |   Credits  |   Contact  |  
« Q & A of the Day: Sandy Berger
The Myth of the Multiculturalist Philosophy »

Why Won’t the Government Feed My Kids for Me?

Chris in Paris — who ironically writes for AMERICAblog — is attacking Republicans for a proposal that might eliminate free and reduced lunches for up to 40K kids.

Here’s a News Flash for you: as sad and disheartening as the plight of poor, hungry kids is…it is not the Government’s job to feed your kids for you. Amongst the most basic and most important roles of being a parent, is the ability to feed your own children.

The measure would require legal immigrants to live in the United States for seven years before becoming eligible to receive food stamps, rather than the current five years.

Sounds reasonable to me. You should be in this country (legally) long enough to have contributed to the system before you start taking handouts from it.

Posted by Robbie Cooper on Thursday, November 3rd, 2005 | Trackback |

8 Responses to “Why Won’t the Government Feed My Kids for Me?”

Why shouldn’t the government help as many people as possible? That’s what it’s there for.

Left by Lincoln on November 4th, 2005 at 3:02 am

Lincoln, the government is ME. It’s MY tax money. Why should I feed YOU? I’ll gladly feed a hungry person at my own table or through a voluntary contribution, but I take issue with your attitude. Don’t you think people should have to WORK for a living and don’t you think mothers and fathers have responsibility to feed their children? You need a lesson on communism.

Left by dianne on November 4th, 2005 at 9:36 am

Would’t it be great if the government fed everybody? I mean, if we completely disassemble the entire military, the money saved would be enough to feed every poor child in this country (even those hundreds of thousands who are here illegally) filet mingon and cavier every day until their 18th b-day.

Yeah, that would be a super idea.

Ooooh, and if we quit spending so much money on incarcerating prisoners (just do away with all jails and prisons…which means you could eliminate govn’t spending on cops, too), we could make unlimited health care available to everybody.

I mean, having the gov’t provide for everybody’s welfare has worked out really well for Cuba and Russia…

Left by Robbie on November 4th, 2005 at 10:18 am

Once again the right wants to legislate according to how they want the world to be rather than how it is.

Of course parents should feed their kids. But the school lunch programs were started as a response to the real problem of kids not being well fed. This detracted from their physical and mental development as well as their ability to focus on their studies.

We could allow these children to suffer negative effects caused by poor or negligent parents, but why? To punish them for their parents’ failings? There is no logic or compassion in that policy and it’s bizarre to place ideology on a pedestal above school children.

Left by Preston on November 4th, 2005 at 12:00 pm

I know the tax payers fund the government, and I know what communism is. Helping feed the poor is not communism. Some people just don’t make it in life.

Try to see SOME good intent. Believe it or not, some people attempt to not be greedy.

Left by Lincoln on November 4th, 2005 at 12:28 pm

I agree with you Lincoln. The key thing to remember in this particular issue is not that the gov’t has proposed yanking all free lunch programs from every poor kid in America.

Those who most need these programs will still get them. But there has to be a limit on how much the gov’t can provide, and to whom.

This measure is saying that we can’t feed everybody, not that we can’t feed anybody.

Left by Robbie on November 4th, 2005 at 12:51 pm

I just watched a C-Span repeat of the house debate on the school lunch program. According to what I heard, the cuts made were to eliminate states double and triple dipping into the matching funds provided by the federal government .. in other words some states would take those school lunch matching funds from the federal government and put them into another state program that would be eligible for federal matching funds..double or triple dipping in some instances into federal funds. This should be illegal. I don’t think it’s a partisan problem either. I’m sure it occurs in both parties for many different kinds of programs. Along with all the other costs of administering a program like this, I’m surprised the kids get anything to eat at all.

Left by dianne on November 5th, 2005 at 10:37 am

What it really is the right is anti pro choice , but doesn’t want to help with the children after they get here. I’m not pro abortion but I don’t believe in the death peanlty an I’m willing to take care of the children after they are here. That’s the difference in the evil right an the great left.

http://www.thenation.com/

Left by Coop1974a on November 8th, 2005 at 10:47 pm

Got something you want to say?

Quicktags:


Notes:

You have 10 minutes after you submit your comment to edit it. Simply click the E(dit) link above the countdown-counter at the bottom of your comment. You can only edit a comment from the same IP address from where the original comment was submitted.

If your comment does not appear immediately, it has been sent to the moderation queue for approval.

Your comment either contained more than 2 hyperlinks, or it used a word(s) that are on my Spam blacklist. Comments awaiting moderation will usually be approved within a day.

And, being that it's my blog and all...I reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.