Well the hungry children can be shipped overseas to follow the jobs that Republicans shipped overseas.
Republican now hate hungry children
Ever heard of the General Welfare and Defense clause? Nutrition directly affects the competitiveness and therefore welfare and national security of the entire country.
So..... instead of blaming it on the House Republicans why not pass the amendment and make the Senate Republicans block it and then you actually have someone to blame?
Right now I don't see how you can blame the Republicans, unless you disagree with the amendment, if the Senate Republicans block its passage I will stand right next to you in blaming them for this bill not getting passed.
Until then, balls in the D's court.
I just have to laugh. We have the usual, predictable response from the left: the poor children!!!, coupled with the usual twisted idiocy that accompanies so many of their arguments, and to top it all off, Throckmorton pulls out the race card. I swear, do you guys use a script when you "debate"?
Do you use a script for your responses? Shut up, honestly.
Do you use a script for your responses? Shut up, honestly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyColtsFan
I just have to laugh. We have the usual, predictable response from the left: the poor children!!!, coupled with the usual twisted idiocy that accompanies so many of their arguments, and to top it all off, Throckmorton pulls out the race card. I swear, do you guys use a script when you "debate"?
Just put him on your ignore list
The Internets is much cleaner that way :thumbsup:
If kids are eating school lunch, by definition the parent isn't. And really they shouldn't be. You can't pack a true nutritious lunch. Peanut butter and jelly, the lunch box staple, is mostly empty calories. Same goes for all the other crap that lasts for 5 hours... lunchmeats, whitebread, etc.
Also though, students are wards of the school system while they're at school, so that makes them the school's responsibility.
food stamps, ironicallyWhat happened to PAYGO?
Where is the $4.5 billion coming from, what is being cut?
the additional ~6 cents a meal is supposed to be enough to buy and prep healthy food rather than the deep fried shit sticks with a side of instant mashed potatoes or french fries. the real culprit is probably the liquid sugar, ert, 'milk' that the dairy board has managed to addict every child in 'mericuh to and gets served in schools. we'd probably have a healthier lunch of no additional cost if, instead of subsidizing dairy farmers, we used that cash to buy and prep healthy food.Aren't our kids obese? Where is the compelling need to feed them another $4.5 billion worth of food anyway?
Fern
Ever heard of the General Welfare and Defense clause? Education and school nutrition directly affects the competitiveness and therefore welfare and national security of the entire country.
QFT.
btw OP is as bad as Republicans who say Democrats hate the troops.
What happened to PAYGO?
Where is the $4.5 billion coming from, what is being cut?
------------------
Aren't our kids obese? Where is the compelling need to feed them another $4.5 billion worth of food anyway?
Fern
irony.
What happened to PAYGO?
Where is the $4.5 billion coming from, what is being cut?
------------------
Aren't our kids obese? Where is the compelling need to feed them another $4.5 billion worth of food anyway?
Fern
You aren't serious, are you? Poor quality food and mild to moderate food insecurity are significantly linked with obesity. I thought this was common knowledge.
-snip-
Also though, students are wards of the school system while they're at school, so that makes them the school's responsibility.
The bill would provide money to serve more than 20 million additional after-school meals annually to children in all 50 states. Many of those children now only receive after-school snacks. It would also increase the number of children eligible for school meals programs by at least 115,000, using Medicaid and census data to identify them.
Republicans used a procedural maneuver Wednesday to try to amend the $4.5 billion bill, which would give more needy children the opportunity to eat free lunches at school and make those lunches healthier.
Obesity is caused by two things: Lack of exercise and too many calories. Period.
The propensity for obesity is linked to genetics, and the weight of the mother during pregnancy. Period.
Throwing billions at school lunches won't do anything but make you feel better.
No irony here. Unlike you guys, I can discuss the issue without screaming emotional arguments (the poor children!!!11!!), without using ridiculous stretches of logic ("General welfare!"), and even better, when all else fails, the race card. Exactly what I pointed out earlier, and it must have got your panties in a wad. You know it is bad when the forum loser (McOwned) jumps in to defend you and you tell me to "Shut up." LOL!
The argument that $4.5 billion isn't much money is true, but I keep seeing that argument made for all spending. "$4.5 billion isn't much." "Oh, well, $60 billion isn't much." You guys don't get it. These things add up QUICKLY and we don't have the money to pay for it. Was there a $4.5 billion spending cut elsewhere to offset this spending?
Parents need to take responsibility for feeding their own kids. We cannot keep spending money for Uncle Sam to become the parent. At some point, we have to say "Enough is enough." Emotional arguments, lip biting, wringing your hands, and throwing your little temper tantrum won't pay the bills.
Obesity is caused by two things: Lack of exercise and too many calories. Period.
The propensity for obesity is linked to genetics, and the weight of the mother during pregnancy. Period.
Throwing billions at school lunches won't do anything but make you feel better.
Honestly, I was just trolling you. And you typed 3 paragraphs.
No irony here. Unlike you guys, I can discuss the issue without screaming emotional arguments (the poor children!!!11!!), without using ridiculous stretches of logic ("General welfare!"), and even better, when all else fails, the race card. Exactly what I pointed out earlier, and it must have got your panties in a wad. You know it is bad when the forum loser (McOwned) jumps in to defend you and you tell me to "Shut up." LOL!
The argument that $4.5 billion isn't much money is true, but I keep seeing that argument made for all spending. "$4.5 billion isn't much." "Oh, well, $60 billion isn't much." You guys don't get it. These things add up QUICKLY and we don't have the money to pay for it. Was there a $4.5 billion spending cut elsewhere to offset this spending?