So either you feel the hungry can starve to death quietly, or you feel by simply cutting $, that it will magically go only to the GOOD people who need it, and not the lazy. If you want reform, great…REFORM. Instead we simply cut everyone’s benefits b/c of a few bad apples. Good people will suffer b/c of this.
It’s amazing to me how the spin on this has been effective for one party, and not the other. The $40B is not, I repeat, not a slash, but simply a paring down of the increase, and this is over a period of 10 years. Instead of rising 65% as the Democratic party had wanted (to a CBO estimated $764Billion, the “slashing” the Republicans did will only allow food stamps to rise 57% (to a CBO estimated $725Billion) over that period. Democrats have done an excellent job of painting the Republicans as against the poor and hungry, when both parties plan to expand food stamps over the next 10 years, it’s just a question of how much.
Hmm, Mike has drawn “Gizmo”, one of the cats my son “inherited”. Gizmo will spend hours staring at a blank wall, waiting for something to happen, or maybe just seeing something that doesn’t exist?
Yes!!! Thank you, Mike Luckovich!!! I was feeling so sorry for elephants being maligned by their association with Republicans!!!! Instead of a cat as the new symbol though, I recommend a honey badger, ‘cause they just don’t give a sh**!!!
Excellent point. I mean that; thank you. Let’s build on your point: what do CARE, UNICEF, and other relief organizations provide for the truly starving?Rice, Beans, Nuts, and other healthy foods that fill the stomach and provide nutrition. What do we provide for hungry Americans? The “Dollar Menu”, high in fats, sugars, and sodium, low in protein. Alternatively, there are many products available at the local grocery that provide mass quantities of high-fructose corn syrup (sugar), dextrose (sugar), maltose (sugar), maltodextrose….you get the picture. Oh, and don’t forget growth hormones and antibiotics, all of which are still protected by a generous farm bill that ONLY had room to cut food stamps; agribusiness is subsidized just as much as ever.I believe the correct answer is to restrict the types of foods that food stamps are allowed to buy. Fresh fruits, vegetables, meats (doesn’t have to be vienna sausage, but doesn’t have to be lobster tails either), nuts, grains. Or is that too much like a nanny state?And let’s not forget that the end result of making sugary, salty, fatty foods the most affordable is diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, and arthritis resulting from too much pressure on joints. Penny-wise and pound foolish.
Vermont Premium Member over 10 years ago
Too much starch in your panties this morning?
magicwalnut Premium Member over 10 years ago
Darned right! Let them eat cake!
rockngolfer over 10 years ago
I agree. Their mascot should be a skunk or a platypus to show how wretched or out of time they are.
jonpeterson001 over 10 years ago
So either you feel the hungry can starve to death quietly, or you feel by simply cutting $, that it will magically go only to the GOOD people who need it, and not the lazy. If you want reform, great…REFORM. Instead we simply cut everyone’s benefits b/c of a few bad apples. Good people will suffer b/c of this.
jazzmoose over 10 years ago
Yeah. The bad economy had nothing to do with the increase of foodstamp recipients.
Enoki over 10 years ago
Cats are picky eaters.
T Gabriel Premium Member over 10 years ago
Brilliant!
curtisls87 over 10 years ago
It’s amazing to me how the spin on this has been effective for one party, and not the other. The $40B is not, I repeat, not a slash, but simply a paring down of the increase, and this is over a period of 10 years. Instead of rising 65% as the Democratic party had wanted (to a CBO estimated $764Billion, the “slashing” the Republicans did will only allow food stamps to rise 57% (to a CBO estimated $725Billion) over that period. Democrats have done an excellent job of painting the Republicans as against the poor and hungry, when both parties plan to expand food stamps over the next 10 years, it’s just a question of how much.
robnvon Premium Member over 10 years ago
Mike,
Shouldn’t it be a “fat cat”?
Robert
Dtroutma over 10 years ago
Hmm, Mike has drawn “Gizmo”, one of the cats my son “inherited”. Gizmo will spend hours staring at a blank wall, waiting for something to happen, or maybe just seeing something that doesn’t exist?
nate9279 over 10 years ago
Yes!!! Thank you, Mike Luckovich!!! I was feeling so sorry for elephants being maligned by their association with Republicans!!!! Instead of a cat as the new symbol though, I recommend a honey badger, ‘cause they just don’t give a sh**!!!
I Play One On TV over 10 years ago
Excellent point. I mean that; thank you. Let’s build on your point: what do CARE, UNICEF, and other relief organizations provide for the truly starving?Rice, Beans, Nuts, and other healthy foods that fill the stomach and provide nutrition. What do we provide for hungry Americans? The “Dollar Menu”, high in fats, sugars, and sodium, low in protein. Alternatively, there are many products available at the local grocery that provide mass quantities of high-fructose corn syrup (sugar), dextrose (sugar), maltose (sugar), maltodextrose….you get the picture. Oh, and don’t forget growth hormones and antibiotics, all of which are still protected by a generous farm bill that ONLY had room to cut food stamps; agribusiness is subsidized just as much as ever.I believe the correct answer is to restrict the types of foods that food stamps are allowed to buy. Fresh fruits, vegetables, meats (doesn’t have to be vienna sausage, but doesn’t have to be lobster tails either), nuts, grains. Or is that too much like a nanny state?And let’s not forget that the end result of making sugary, salty, fatty foods the most affordable is diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, and arthritis resulting from too much pressure on joints. Penny-wise and pound foolish.