Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Child Nutrition Legislation


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Child Nutrition Legislation Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/2/2010 1:17:56 PM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

From what I've seen the Republican ideal is to be able to be fat and unhealthy with no health insurance and let the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. Just because it is their GOD GIVEN right by golly!!!!!!!!



Yup and the Democrat ideal is to sit back, collect government checks and whine because the rich mother fuckers get all the breaks. Then they get big brother to make laws that let others raise their kids because little johnny wants a happy meal, but he won't like me if I tell him no.

Ain't America great




Actually, in this part of the country, a majority of the SSI, EBT and other welfare recipients are HARDCORE Republicans

Apart from those who are teabaggers, of course.
;)

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/2/2010 1:27:54 PM   
Louve00


Posts: 1674
Joined: 2/1/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

Tazzy, that is one of the biggest reasons I do not understand how anyone middle class or, of lesser income can, with informed intelligent intent, support the Republican party. It just baffles me.


I've often wondered the same thing myself!


_____________________________

For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearance, as though they were realities and are often more influenced by the things that seem than by those that are. - Niccolo Machiavelli

(in reply to LaTigresse)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/2/2010 1:37:51 PM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
Maybe it's a Horatio Alger thing: they don't want to have to pay taxes, should they become rich without starving to death or dying of a treatable medical condition the ER won't touch because it's a long term thing not something that can be treated with surgery in the meantime?
It's no more stupid a gamble than buying a lottery ticket, in those terms...

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to Louve00)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/2/2010 3:02:53 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife
quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEgh88ueqsQ

Or just not let them talk or submit what appears to be a reasonable objection even if no one is listening.


A reasonable objection?

This is just the same obstructionism that Republicans have been using to try and block any legislation sponsored by Democrats.

Whether it is worthy or not Republicans don't seem to care, as long as it scores them political points.

If it didn't go thru the process then the objection is reasonable.  If someone wants to speak on it they should be allowed.   The purpose of a chair is not to dictate but to rule on parlimentary procedure (whichever one is being used).   The parlimentarian isn't the one to rule but he advises the chair. 


For Republicans to have a reasonable objection, they would first need to have principles that those objections are based on. As Tazzy pointed out above, the Republican Party (and those silly Tea Baggers) are 'for' less goverment, not more. That is their principle. So when they are holding up something, because it doesnt have enough goverement in it, I call B.S.!

This is the same stupid and silly tactics the GOP has done since Mr. Obama came to the White House. The 'Party of No', cares not for Americans, just merely themselves. This, sadly, is just one more perfect example of their 'principles' on display.

Good nutrition, proper exercise, healthy learning, are all ways we help the next generation be better, it a world ever increasing pushing the 'cough potato' syndrome of working at a computer for 12 hours. I am not at all surprise they made a stand on this. Apparently, Republicans are against this as well. Why would they want health, intelligent and educated Americans; those people seem to always vote Democrat?


Joe   Please show where I don't have principles. 

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/2/2010 4:50:11 PM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline


_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to LaTigresse)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/2/2010 7:12:42 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

From what I've seen the Republican ideal is to be able to be fat and unhealthy with no health insurance and let the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. Just because it is their GOD GIVEN right by golly!!!!!!!!



Yup and the Democrat ideal is to sit back, collect government checks and whine because the rich mother fuckers get all the breaks. Then they get big brother to make laws that let others raise their kids because little johnny wants a happy meal, but he won't like me if I tell him no.

Ain't America great




Actually, in this part of the country, a majority of the SSI, EBT and other welfare recipients are HARDCORE Republicans

Apart from those who are teabaggers, of course.
;)



You'd be amazed (or maybe not) how many teabaggers have those little medicare paid for scooters and handicap stickers and SSI disability.

(in reply to Moonhead)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/2/2010 8:34:40 PM   
Elisabella


Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Republicans are pro life untill they are born. After that....FUKUM.

Seriously, most every state already requires background checks on those who work with kids. For some reason, churches are exempt here. THAT makes a lot of sense neh?

It's a lot worse than just trying to stop parents feeding the kids crap, to be fair. If you do a venn diagram of politicians who are opposed to birth control and/or abortion on demand, and politicians who are opposed to welfare spending on the permanent underclass, it's pretty close to an exact match, isn't it?

If the cunts want people who can't afford to raise kids to have them, they can fucking well pay for them to be fed, housed and educated as well. Otherwise, they can stick their fundamentalist moralising up their arses.


You're not taking into account that pro-life people genuinely view abortion as the murder of a human being.

From a pro-life perspective, what you're saying sounds like "well shoot, if you're going to stop me from bashing this homeless guy's brains in, you damn well better feed and house him, otherwise quit your moralizing."

(in reply to Moonhead)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/2/2010 10:39:29 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
"Mind elaborating, T? "

I assume you mean post 38 ? I mean that some, not all in this country deserve the shit government we have. Not all.

Perhaps most, perhaps not. We all know there are alot of assholes out there who are out for themselves and nothing else, so to say we got the government we deserve is to mean that I would be one of "we" here. That is not so, and is what burns me up about the world. It could be so much better. We have the government that panders to the lowest common denominator, which I assure you I am not. And neither are others. Many of "us" have to put up with the idiocy in this world, mostly over bullshit, and we are supposed to be happy about it ?

Yeah right. But the fact is that some people do deserve this shit. I can't do much about that, but why do I have to put up with it ? Is it my punishment for being an asshole in the past ?

If so, why punish the whole world ?

T

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/3/2010 5:19:49 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
As a country, we have allowed what is happening to happen. We keep voting the same types of people in, listen to their blathering, and blindly follow the talking heads whom we identify with the most.

Based upon that, American has the kind of government she deserves. Its just not the one she needs.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/3/2010 5:41:16 AM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Republicans are pro life untill they are born. After that....FUKUM.

Seriously, most every state already requires background checks on those who work with kids. For some reason, churches are exempt here. THAT makes a lot of sense neh?

It's a lot worse than just trying to stop parents feeding the kids crap, to be fair. If you do a venn diagram of politicians who are opposed to birth control and/or abortion on demand, and politicians who are opposed to welfare spending on the permanent underclass, it's pretty close to an exact match, isn't it?

If the cunts want people who can't afford to raise kids to have them, they can fucking well pay for them to be fed, housed and educated as well. Otherwise, they can stick their fundamentalist moralising up their arses.


You're not taking into account that pro-life people genuinely view abortion as the murder of a human being.

From a pro-life perspective, what you're saying sounds like "well shoot, if you're going to stop me from bashing this homeless guy's brains in, you damn well better feed and house him, otherwise quit your moralizing."


No it doesn't. That's a mind numbingly specious analogy. The homeless guy already exists, for a start.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to Elisabella)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/3/2010 8:38:24 AM   
Elisabella


Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

No it doesn't. That's a mind numbingly specious analogy. The homeless guy already exists, for a start.


Are you saying the zygote/fetus doesn't exist? Or are you saying you don't think it's a human life? I'm not going to get into a debate about whether you consider a fetus to be a human life and abortion to be murder, because that's beside the point, which is that pro-lifers do believe it to be taking a human life. And it has to be viewed within that context...your viewpoint is common, actually, that pro-lifers are somehow hypocrites for wanting to prevent what they view as murder but being unwilling to financially support the would-be victim. But it's actually internally consistent.

The problem with my analogy is not that aborted fetuses do not exist, but that there's no inherent expectation that a murderer of homeless people would take care of them. A better analogy would have been stopping a parent from killing an already born child.

(in reply to Moonhead)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/3/2010 8:47:44 AM   
servantforuse


Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline
Maybe parents should be more responsible and see that their children have a lunch to eat, and not the Federal government.

(in reply to Elisabella)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/3/2010 8:48:59 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
Up until just a few months ago, mr servantm how many people had a job before the government and big business fucked up the economy?

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to servantforuse)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/3/2010 8:53:53 AM   
Elisabella


Posts: 3939
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

Maybe parents should be more responsible and see that their children have a lunch to eat, and not the Federal government.


I agree, parents should be responsible for their children.

The problem is that letting the child go hungry punishes the child, not the parent.

(in reply to servantforuse)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/3/2010 2:21:36 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
When I was in Cali I was required by the school to submit for the free meal program.   Between my wife and I we made somewhere around 6K a month net.  It was approved every time because we were considered poor.   The school told me that if I didn't sign the kids up, that they couldn't go to that school because they would lose funding.  Never made sense to me.  Can someone explain this?

(in reply to Elisabella)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/5/2010 7:55:59 AM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

No it doesn't. That's a mind numbingly specious analogy. The homeless guy already exists, for a start.


Are you saying the zygote/fetus doesn't exist? Or are you saying you don't think it's a human life?

The latter, obviously. If it can't survive outside the womb, it isn't a human being yet. Sorry if you don't like it, but the pro lifers haven't managed to change that as a legal definition yet.

quote:

The problem with my analogy is not that aborted fetuses do not exist, but that there's no inherent expectation that a murderer of homeless people would take care of them. A better analogy would have been stopping a parent from killing an already born child.

In which case, maybe you shouldn't have used such a ridiculous comparison in the first place?

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to Elisabella)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/5/2010 7:57:02 AM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

When I was in Cali I was required by the school to submit for the free meal program.   Between my wife and I we made somewhere around 6K a month net.  It was approved every time because we were considered poor.   The school told me that if I didn't sign the kids up, that they couldn't go to that school because they would lose funding.  Never made sense to me.  Can someone explain this?

Are any other forms of state or federal funding for the kids tied in with them being on the free meal programme?

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/5/2010 8:22:47 AM   
JstAnotherSub


Posts: 6174
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

When I was in Cali I was required by the school to submit for the free meal program.   Between my wife and I we made somewhere around 6K a month net.  It was approved every time because we were considered poor.   The school told me that if I didn't sign the kids up, that they couldn't go to that school because they would lose funding.  Never made sense to me.  Can someone explain this?


Some districts who have a high Free & Reduced population can get all their meals approved as free.  Receiving food stamps and some programs for a special needs child automatically qualifies all the students in that household to receive free lunches.

If none of those were the case in the district you speak of, they were committing many felonies.

_____________________________

yep

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/5/2010 10:51:01 AM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


Are any other forms of state or federal funding for the kids tied in with them being on the free meal programme?



Not that I know of

quote:

ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub

Some districts who have a high Free & Reduced population can get all their meals approved as free.  Receiving food stamps and some programs for a special needs child automatically qualifies all the students in that household to receive free lunches.

If none of those were the case in the district you speak of, they were committing many felonies.



As far as I am concerned they weren't    and I agree it should have been a felony



(in reply to Moonhead)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Child Nutrition Legislation - 12/5/2010 11:21:10 AM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
It sounds dodgy, but I do wonder what on earth the school board got out of it if the kids being on the free lunch thing didn't make them eligible for any other grants or supplementaries.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Child Nutrition Legislation Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094