The fact that its been so normalized to be this openly shitty and callous toward frigging children... i dont even know how to react to this any more.
Im not saying its hopeless, but I feel like a lot of people on the "lets not let children go hungry" side of the fence are almost left speechless by these idiots. But i feel like thats almost part of their strategy - stunning the opposition. There has to be a better response.
What's the best way to respond to this kind of brazen cruelty? (Besides voting and campaigning for candidates who arent sociopathic).
What's the best way to respond to this kind of brazen cruelty?
Voting is a must. Political apathy is how this stuff happens. Outside of voting, just being vocal about your distaste for these policies might help let people around you know that not everyone supports this. And if you come face to face with someone who is outspoken in their belief that some children deserve to starve, then you know who to avoid being around.
More people voted for trump after his disastrous 4 years in office than did when he first got elected. I don't think voting is the answer because we are stupid. Educating these idiots would go a long way, but they don't believe in education. Being controlled by their extended, daily, two minute hate is all they seem to know or want.
I taught at a couple school where the majority of the students got their only 2 meals a day when at school. And these fuck heads think that's too much. It makes me sick.
Voting is the answer (at least part of the answer) because it's what kept Trump out of office for another four years despite him getting all those votes. Now even more of Gen Z is voting age, as long as they vote like they did in the midterms conservatives don't have long in office. They'll have some gerrymandered strongholds like Texas and Florida but things should slowly be getting better now that more and more of the conservative voters are dying off either from old age or COVID.
Seriously these past midterms were historic, this millennial loves Gen Z lol
That's not helping the many people being screwed over by anti-trans and anti-abortion bills, or with all of the anti-worker crap the republicans and the dems (albeit to a lesser extent) have been implementing. I'm worried it's going to be too late for a lot of people by the time things get good (not just better, actually good without 50 million horrible things going off constantly; not perfect, but not constantly under peril). Well, if they do. And of course there's the matter of climate change. I'm worried it's gonna be too late by then as well... ~Cherri
That’s not helping the many people being screwed over by anti-trans and anti-abortion bills
A cure all does not exist unfortunately and I don't know of any solutions for the affected minorities in those areas other than leave when possible. Which is easier said than done I know, I did it with my move out of Texas.
I’m worried it’s going to be too late for a lot of people by the time things get good.
It likely is going to be too late for many groups of people, I don't like that reality but it's true. This is the shit situation our generation was given and we just have to do our best to improve it as best we can for future generations. We can only do that by fighting and not letting apathy take over.
And of course there’s the matter of climate change. I’m worried it’s gonna be too late by then as well.
Too late for what? For the environment to change? That point passed decades ago, unfortunately. We've been at the pollution game for a while. Too late to mitigate as much damage as possible? Absolutely not. The best time to plant a tree is yesterday but the next best time is today. Our planet is changing due to the actions of the old and it's on us to adapt as a society. We adapt by changing policies and we change policies by getting involved in politics, the easiest form of which is simply voting.
The future is going to be rough and certainly not what I would've chosen, but it's not untenable or unconquerable.
I mean like too late to mitigate it enough for it to not destroy the environment completely. And most of the pollution is not from individuals but from corporations. I mean hell, most pollution from airplanes comes from private jets. Commercial passenger planes don't do nearly as much damage as those (though they do quite a bit of damage and should be limited where possible). ~Cherri
I mean like too late to mitigate it enough for it to not destroy the environment completely.
Except that's not a thing, it's impossible for the environment to be completely destroyed. Even when a forest turns to desert the desert is still an environment that can be adapted to and improved on. The world as we know it will change dramatically, that's just something that's unavoidable at this point. But we can help make the next version of this world the best we can.
As long as you're alive it's never too late to take action.
A lot of species are going extinct faster than new ones are popping up. ~Cherri
Yes, that's part of the changing world. Not something I'm happy about but something we can't change. There are projects sequencing their genome so that we can hopefully clone/revive the species at a later time however. So there are things that can be done to mitigate even those changes. Not a perfect solution but it's something.
If you truly believe there's no hope and we can't do anything to change it then I implore you to follow your own word and don't bother commenting doomerisms since it doesn't help anything.
If you want to give up, fine. Just do it by yourself. I'm going to keep fighting as long as there's life in this body.
It's not that I think there's hope, it's that I don't know if there is, but I know this is something people have been trying for years with relatively little to show for it. ~Cherri
Gerrymandering should have no impact on the Senate or the Executive elections, aside from the subressive effect. We still vote for geriatric vampires more often then not, and those geriatric vampires really, really can't let the new, fresh people have positions of power. We've seen that happen over and over with those who should be stars (effective stars) in Congress. I understand completely that it's better than the fucking Republicans, but it's kind of like picking what method you're going to die from. I think you're vastly underestimating the deplorable factor in the US. For once though, finally, it does seem like these younger generations are making a hard turn to do the right thing. I hope it pays off, just on a pragmatic level I think we've already passed the point of no return so I'm just watching the world slowly burn.
I think you're underestimating the effects of old generations dying off while simultaneously a supremely motivated younger generation is coming in. I'm not saying it'll be smooth sailing and that voting alone is the answer, I'm saying we have to keep fighting and voting is part of the answer. It's not the silver bullet that will solve everything but we can't move forward with fascists in office so we have to vote them out.
It’s really hard to convince people that voting matters. And in many places, the districts are set up in such a way that it favors a certain party’s outcome.
Republicans seem to be more popular with older people, who also are more likely to be voting. Younger people are much less likely to participate.
Personally I’m pretty sick of it all myself. I still vote though. I just wish that it wasn’t all about arguments between parties and we could focus on what’s best for people.
If only the only other option weren't also trash. Then wouldn't be so much voter apathy. The system is literally designed to be this way. The US being a democratic country is a myth. The founders never even intended it to be a democracy. They just wanted it to be their own little club. Plebs were never even meant to be able to vote.
The "other side" (Democrats) are still picking your pockets and laughing with rich buddies, but they aren't for letting children go hungry, get married early and work for minimum wage in all their free time. All the while getting upset at rainbows and whatever the scapegoat of the week is.
The sad part is that for the americans to do good, they have to vote democrat. I am glad I don't live there.
We've been trying to vote and vote for decades, haven't we? When's it gonna work out? How do we make sure it's not too late for a lot of people by then, and/or too late to deal with climate change by then? ~Cherri
Not voting is not a choice, because then these bastards get even more power, it is a sad reality.
You can't get more power than all of it.
As of now democrats controll the senate.
That doesn't answer any of my questions. ~Cherri
It is working out, if I am not mistaken, each setback the republicans suffer slows them down in making the US more awful, it is just hard to notice. The political system is trapped in a two-paty-system where both parties are corporate puppets. Without a new Ross Perrot there is no hope of changing that.
So it's not working out. The way you're putting it just sounds like this is hopeless and delaying the inevitable. ~Cherri
Unless:
A politician shows up that can actually change course.
Enough folks vote to put a halt to this and perhaps even reverse it. Delaying it might be a first step.
Protests put enough pressure on them to stop.
Civil rights movements have been succesful in the past, and letting it slip is just a waste.
Listen, this is hard thing for me to type but I think is relevant to the Republican mindset. Hundreds of children are being murdered in their classrooms. Literal murder. Of children. This is not enough to sway Republicans on gun control. If actual murder of 6 year olds doesn't have any effect on them, surely 6 year olds being hungry is not even going to make them blink. This is the reality with these people. They simply do not care about you, or your children, and everything they do is governed only by money and power.
Why do they prioritize money and power over the welfare of society? What makes them think it's a good idea? ~Cherri
Because that is the goal of any totalitarian regime. You think Putin has the welfare of his country in mind? Or Kim Jong Un? No. Money and Power is the only goal. There was an article recently on North Koreans saying how they're starving and just waiting to die. The people are simply the means to generate wealth and exercise power. Their welfare has nothing to do with it.
I used to think the Republicans were wannabe dictators, but in the last few years they've demonstrated that they are actual fascists and a dictatorship is their endgame. There is no way to deny this anymore. If people tell you who they are, you should listen to them. Republicans are no longer hiding it.
I know that's their goal but it doesn't explain why that's their goal. ~Cherri
Oh this is nothing by comparison. Republicans also vote to legalize child rape (which they preciously insist on calling "child marriage") and are trying to bring back child labor because adults are getting fed up with unfair labor practices while little kids are easier to manipulate.
I would say it would be the education of the American people. That stuff like this should be at the top of just about every news program out there.
What sucks is that most people in America, red and blue, are probably not even aware that this is happening. If more people knew what was going on then maybe things like this would stop because of either people voting these politicians out or causing so much outrage they change their minds.
Many people who don't interact with schools or kids in general don't think about them at all, except as a tax burden and a political football. It's a sickness on this country.
Chapter 1: The Power of Love
Chapter 2: ...
Is a curious thing...
Wait, is that not what you meant?
Literally everyone in this comment section is missing “regardless of the individual eligibility of each student”. Everyone is getting hysterical over something that isn’t even in the cards.
Of course a lot of kids rely on free school lunches and they aren’t trying to take that away. They’re trying to restrict free lunches to kids with parents who are actually incapable of feeding them. If parents can afford food for their kids, feed your fucking kids.
I'm lefty as fuck and I still kind of empathize with people who consider themselves conservative being seriously over people characterizing literally any conservative action they take as cartoonishly evil.
And you're missing that, without the free meals being available to everyone, there's a negative social stigma to getting the free school lunches. Kids skip the meals because they don't want to be seen as "that poor kid." This leads to them going hungry, not doing well in school, and not having as many chances to break the cycle of poverty.
By opening the free school lunches to everyone, the stigma is removed. If Billy gets a free school lunch, he might be poor or his parents just might be having him get the school lunches instead of packing something. Without the social stigma, kids who need the lunches are more likely to get them and more kids are fed.
Aight, cool, but that doesn't change that this comment section is operation on the assumption that you're dealing with people who understand that and literally enjoy making children starve. This sort of characterization is rampant in politics and a total anathema to actual discussion or ever getting anything done.
Given that other Republican proposals involve keeping child marriage legal and opening child labor laws back up so that kids can work dangerous jobs without the companies involved being liable for their safety, it's not a huge leap from "Republicans want to cut free school meals" to "Republicans want kids to starve."
Maybe it's a not a 100% real leap, but it's one that the Republicans have set themselves up for.
Beyond disgusting. Keep the kids hungry so they can't learn while sitting in their underfunded classrooms. Uneducated masses ripe for the conservative picking. Can't see through their lies if you've never been taught how to think. I hate it here...
Why….. I grew up on free and reduced lunches. The return on investment here is immense.
I make six figures working at the highest levels of my career in support of government agencies. I used free/reduced lunches my entire schooling. It’s super ridiculous
Same, my property tax for this month alone will have more than paid for my entire schooling career of subsidized food.
Honestly what's an extra few hundred a year in taxes on the multiple thousands I'm already being asked to pay? Our district went free meals during covid and just kept it up. Free breakfast and lunch and there's no more stigma for getting it since it's everyone getting it.
Everyone seems happy about this, and it helps kids do better in school. Better than wasting all that food just because someone can't pay the $1-3.
Also, Republicans (supposedly) want people to get off of government assistance and earn money for themselves. You know what's a great way to do that? Get a good paying job. And a good way to get one of those is to pay attention and learn while you're in school.
However, if your family is poor and you need to skip meals, you'll be more concerned with when your next meal is. You won't pay attention and you'll have limited options to break the poverty cycle when you grow up. This leads to people still needing government assistance.
Just going from the supposed Republican talking points of "getting people off government assistance is good," free school lunches is a good idea.
And before anyone comments "just give the lunches to the kids who need them instead of everyone": Social pressure works against this. Kids don't want to stand out and being the kid that gets the free school meal is seen as a negative thing by many kids. Kids would rather skip meals than open themselves up to bullying like this. By giving free school lunches to everyone, the kids that need it can get their lunches without any social stigma.
Along with funding for libraries, I think free school lunches are a great use of taxpayer money!
Don't you know? The only necessary welfare is mine
Why? Assuming this is not a rhetorical question, it follows directly from the core authoritarian principle of Conservatism in the U.S.: Moral Hierarchy. That is to say, Those who rule are privileged above those who serve, and this is the basis of a ranked ever-swelling staircase of privilege.
Any action or policy that supports the hierarchy is divine, and whatever threatens the hierarchy is evil. Free food, or food as a right, is antithetical to Conservatism because it diminishes a key point of leverage held by rulers going up the chain. When a person is fed, they are less inclined to honor the privilege of their supposed rulers. When a person is truly hungry, they are highly motivated to submit, and even to support the hierarchy that provides them with any limited access to food.
In this philosophy, the ROI of free lunch is negative. The same argument applies to most forms of welfare.
The cruelty is the point.
Obviously being nice to 1 person just leads to communism! I'll bet you now believe that people should have access to food, clean water, clean air, health care, and shelter as well? DON'T YOU!?
I do as well. :-)
Same here, kept me fed during my high school years. Don’t know what I would’ve done without it.
Gosh... Just imagine that not guaranteeing a meal to children, preventing them from eating in some cases, is what you want more than anything.
Simply blows my mind.
These people jerk off to the idea of hurting children. Every new policy Republicans come up with, whether its supporting child marriage legalized rape with 12 year olds or trying to bring back child labor, or making children too hungry to learn anything in school, makes their "moral" panic over a bunch of people who happen to be wearing dresses reading to kids even more hypocritical. Honestly I think it's the idea of children being functionally literate that probably terrifies them the most.
Malnutrition leads to developmental delays. Poor academic performance in early years means they're less likely to go to college, and ma not even finish high school. This helps create the next generation of wage slaves that are required for capitalism to survive.
In other words, working as designed.
Why design it like that though? And I know someone's going to say "money and power and evil" or something but that just pushes the question further back. ~Cherri
Why aren't they self aware enough to realize they sound like cartoon villains?
They are appealing to their voters who want them to "hurt the right people"
Why do their voters want them to "hurt the right people" in the first place? And why do they go along with it rather than trying to persuade them not to or targeting a different demographic or anything else? ~Cherri
There is a free book by a psychologist out there called The Authoritarians which might help explain it.
I keep hoping that their voters finally see them for what they are, but well, I guess they do and that's the point...
You know, I try to keep an open mind and try to understand how the other side could come to the conclusions they do, but sometimes they really make it difficult. I genuinely don't get how this could be construed as anything other than malicious. What's the benefit in this? How is this "thinking of the children?" How did a political party come to represent views that are so aggressively anti-humanity? It's such a bizarre platform to attach yourself to so proudly and openly.
Sometime there is no rationality in those people/political party, they exist just to be destructive and promote hatred no matter the reason.
I could go on and on and on about it. Sometime, there is no reasoning with monsters and they need to be destroyed, period.
It's insane seeing how they've built themselves on a platform of strictly hate. It seems like they're never for things only against things. Well I guess outside of the child marriage thing seems they're pretty for that. It's so strange to me that in 2023 the republican party has regressed into essentially a draconian early industrial revolution era roll back of rights. I mean they're even repealing child labor laws. It's literally like they want to remove all progress from the last couple centuries. It blows my mind that this is acceptable in our country in the era.
It's because conservatism is fundamentally reactionary. They don't seem to be professing any particular ideology because they aren't. They never have. It's always been about opposing the ideology of others.
It's also why it's so insidious. You can't pin down someone who doesn't believe in anything.
I’d add to that and say conservatism is an inherently selfish ideology, in addition to reactionary. Every conservative policy, and every value they proclaim, is firmly founded in looking out for one’s self at the expense of their community.
Ah, student loans are, in fact, a problem. One-time relief of student debts is a good thing - provided there are no new debts on such a scale and the mechanism changes after that.
Charity sponsorship of students is a good thing without doubt. Private stipends are a good thing. But when loans which are not going to be returned in a normal way are becoming that common, then something is wrong and should be fixed, not poured more money into.
They are a cause of inflation in education (which, of course, harms the students as well), of people like AOC talking and being listened about economics, because on paper they would be qualified, and so on.
It's really quite shocking how the GOP agenda can be predicted by asking yourself, "What's the worst thing someone would in a given situation?". What's even more shocking is that they have engineered the political framework to disproportionately grant them enough power to sometimes pass these regressive policies. But for most of America, sigh, just another Thursday...
What's crazy to me is it seems like they just want children to suffer. They want to force women to give birth, but then don't give a shit about what happens to the children after. On top of that, it's like they are trying to make them suffer even more for their parents being unable to provide.
I could somewhat get attacking programs for adults. Still disagree, but I guess it's the "they should be able to provide for themselves" mentality. But then doing this for children when they are literally unable to provide for themselves or have any responsibility for being hungry. Yes, let's make the helpless children suffer.
Disgusting times we live in.
They want to force children into the labor pool. Can't afford to eat? Get a job Timmy! Oh and by the way if you don't pay your school lunch debt, we're calling CPS and taking you away from your parents. So get to work!
They see poor people as inherently bad parents. They want ways to take away poor minority children from their parents, and lunch debt is a great way to get them on the radar for that.
And where do they intend to place them once they get an excuse to break up the family?
I think the rich well adjusted foster family is largely a TV creation.
Maybe they'll just straight turn group homes into factories.
They're not even bothering to lie any more, and yet everyone still votes for them.
You know that scene in Final Fantasy 8 where Edea announces her evil plan to a huge crowd and calls them morons and they all clap and cheer? This is like that.
imagine being in the strategy meeting with your team, when they suggest a play based on suspending withdrawing food from child would go well with your voters.
imagine agreeing to go with it. getting a speech written about it and one day standing at the lectern to say in front of crowd of assembled people "it is not our responsiblity to feed children". and then pausing for applause and going home and telling your spouse, "today went great".
in this supply chain of inhumanity, there were so many opportunities for the heart to say "yo...something is off here.....cant quite put my finger on it.......but it doesnt seem.....right ?."
to sail through all those checkpoints of human decency, and go through with it, is nothing less than psychopathy.
The horrifying thing is that there are people out there who will consider it the right thing to do.
“It’s not enough that I should eat, children should starve. “ -the gop.
Either that or "I don't believe that anyone is starving. I just ate a large lunch so obviously nobody is going hungry."
They only recognize that something is real when it affects them personally. If it doesn't then they'll either claim the thing doesn't exist or will say it's that person's fault that they are going through that (likely for being "too lazy" to pull themselves up by their bootstraps).
“I don’t believe that anyone is starving. I just ate a large lunch so obviously nobody is going hungry.”
Exactly. Same energy as "I made a snowball in January so obviously global warming doesn't exist and neither does the sun by the way." Weaponized incompetence at the object permanence level.
If it was just apathy, they wouldn't be going out of their way like this to make it worse. ~Cherri
They care about children until they’re born then they want nothing to do with them. Oh wait they also use children to pass anti lgbt legislation.
And prop up the work force.
How did this get normalized? Why is this even something that is even considered debatable? As a society, feeding our children should be the first priority.
I'm flubbered.
Echo chambers that reinforce the lie that democrats want to take your money to pay for irresponsible people’s children.
Maybe they are irresponsible, but that's not their kids fault. Feeding kids regardless of who their parents are, is a basic morality thing.
But that is the whole point of this. These people making and advocating for this kind of stuff are abusers. The GOP is a pro-abuse party. We need to stop pretending otherwise. The goal is to enable abusers. When these people talk about "parental rights" that is what they mean. They believe they have a right to abuse their kids including starving them. They also believe that anyone who tries to assist their children—even so much as feeding them—is interfering with their right as a parent.
I know this because my step-dad was exactly of this type of mindset when I was a kid. They don't see children as having rights or dignity. They are just property of their parents with zero personage to them. Food insecurity even when the parents have the ability to feed their children is used as a form of control. "If you won't do as we say you won't eat" was very much a thing in my household and a lot of others I knew growing up.
Allowing free breakfast and lunch at school usurps their ability to use hunger and starvation as a punishment. I know it's dark but it's worth noting.
the unplanned kids that arrived under anti abortion laws.
Why do they want the children to suffer for it though??? ~Cherri
i understand its a bullshit argument, but even if were true, idgaf why kids dont have food, i want them to get food one way or another
Well, sweeping chimneys and working night shifts in abattoirs is a good way of acquiring the money for it!
/S
Literally everyone in this comment section is missing “regardless of the individual eligibility of each student”. Everyone is getting hysterical over something that isn’t even in the cards.
Of course a lot of kids rely on free school lunches and they aren’t trying to take that away. They’re trying to restrict free lunches to kids with parents who are actually incapable of feeding them. If parents can afford food for their kids, feed your fucking kids.
I'm admittedly not familiar with how the program works but I suspect that "totally bulletproof and unbiased eligibility criteria that can't / won't be weaponized against specific people groups" isn't something that it guarantees
Tearing down women's rights. Ruining queer people's life, especially trans people. Making sure children can't eat for free. Wow. Quite the priorities over at the Republican party.
I'm not American, I've just been looking from afar for a long time now. But from everything I'm seeing... it feels like they're going to be in for quite the rude awakening in 2024.
Unless you're Russian, you probably aren't familiar with living in the kind of media environment we have which can cause these clearly absurd ideas to seem normal for people to have. This lunacy is within our overton window. Centrists think it's about half right. Liberals think it's wrong but more or less fair to hold these views. A younger and further left contingent which has almost no representation in the government (because we put elecrions upnfor sale in 2010 with Citizens United) but is growing is the only group who finds this kind of thing completely unacceptable.
These are the same people who can expense up to $79 per day for food and drink. They're fine taking hand outs, they just don't want you to have any.
My Daily Reminder that this is a gold plated dystopia.
The second gilded age. And I'm not sure it will end as peacefully as the first.
Just evil… no nuance needed.
Yes. it just breaks my heart that people seem to have a goal to make the lives of the vulnerable as hard as possible.
The whole point in these kind of moves is to cause congestion and exhaustion in political movement.
It’s a struggle to campaign for actual improvements when we’re all stuck fighting garbage like this all the time.
It’s deliberate obstruction and a standard GOP play
What. The. Fuck. Is wrong. With. These people?
I've been thinking about this a lot. I'm absolutely not a psychologist, psychiatrist, or anything similar, but it's starting to show that all of them have forgotten where they came from or the stories of where their family members came from. Most of these people were raised by Depression-Era parents who, without exaggeration, suffered and died due to lack of affordable food options. I'm sure some Republicans even experienced that same problem themselves in their childhood.
I used to believe the ignorance of how important providing basic nutrition to the next generation is was based on a lack of life experience, and that may be true for some, but there's no way every single one of them has no surface-level knowledge of true hardship. They have heard about it, read about it, and some have witnessed it firsthand.
So to answer the question, it's either a part of some long-term plan to control the public for their means (which is evil) or they are selfish pricks (which when you are in government, makes you evil). Unfortunately, it's looking like both.
It's just cruel. A disgusting, cruel mindset from those who genuinely just want to hurt others.
Anyone supporting this lacks the most basic of morals. There is no excuse for this.
it's a weird mindset.
Literally everyone in this comment section is missing “regardless of the individual eligibility of each student”. Everyone is getting hysterical over something that isn’t even in the cards.
Of course a lot of kids rely on free school lunches and they aren’t trying to take that away. They’re trying to restrict free lunches to kids with parents who are actually incapable of feeding them. If parents can afford food for their kids, feed your fucking kids.
They’re trying to restrict free lunches to kids with parents who are actually incapable of feeding them. If parents can afford food for their kids, feed your fucking kids.
i honestly have to ask here: who cares if the children of people who can afford to feed their kids benefit from this policy? means testing is dumb in basically all circumstances, you can't count on parents to do this (and if a child goes to school without a lunch they should still be able to eat!), and even if you don't care about those considerations the policy as a whole is basically a budgetary rounding error. this isn't the F-35 program, your tax dollars aren't being thrown into a black hole because someone with an income of $100,000 has a child also being fed by universal school lunch.
If you want to make that argument, great! I pretty much agree. What's deeply upsetting to me is that this entire comment section is willfully misrepresenting the move as "haha they want children to starve". I guarantee you that everyone here will also claim to be super concerned about how far political rifts have become. Republicans do a lot of awful shit but this is just choosing to characterize people as deeply cruel villains for the sake of entertainment. I can't blame "casual conservatives" from looking at responses like this and deciding that their characterization of the left as overzealous is completely true.
What’s deeply upsetting to me is that this entire comment section is willfully misrepresenting the move as “haha they want children to starve”.
okay but they kinda do. you are giving charitability to people (Republican politicians in Congress) who have clearly demonstrated they do not deserve it and that what they want is for people to be worse off--whether they accept that or not. more children starving because free school meals are restricted to certain income groups is possibly the most straightforward cause-and-effect outcome there can be. the benefits of having them (without means testing) are also undisputable. we literally just had those for two years without issue during the pandemic.
No, see, this is a willful mischaracterization of their ignorance. These are people who are convinced that parents who can afford their feed their children just will if they lack other options. The idea that some would simply choose not to anyways or that means testing is often faulty is further than they've ever actually thought about it. Still cartoonishly evil? Yeah, but it's not "haha I sure do love kids not eating", it's a lack of empathy of a different sort. Telling people that they want children to starve when that's the last thing that probably crossed their mind will never, ever sway someone's understanding of a problem. It will only convince them that your position is based on a strawman. We need to appeal to people's sense that they're good people who want to do good things.
Telling people that they want children to starve when that’s the last thing that probably crossed their mind will never, ever sway someone’s understanding of a problem.
too bad? literally just don't advocate for policy that'll starve children if you don't want to be accused of making children starve--again, we had universal, non-means tested meals in this arena for two years and nobody complained about it then. if you're the type of person who objects now, i don't think that's worth coddling--i think it's worth begin honest, which is that it's a policy that leads to more starving children and it's a deeply inhuman policy overall. you should feel bad for agreeing with it as a person.
We need to appeal to people’s sense that they’re good people who want to do good things.
as for this legislatively: me trying to nicely appeal to a Republican legislator is never going to make them see reason here and not starve children. these people are bad, their policy is worse, and trying to coddle them in particular is a waste of time. they know what they're doing.
This whole reply makes me even more negative towards the future of humanity than I was. Discourse like this is exactly why things are as bad as they are.
The problem is that, when free lunches are restricted to only kids who can't afford lunch, there's a social pressure NOT to get the free lunch. Kids don't want to stand out as "that poor kid." They'll skip lunch instead of being singled out.
Free lunches for everyone fixes this. Kids can't tell if Jimmy is getting the free lunch because his parents didn't pack him one or because his parents can't afford to feed him. The cost to feed the kids is low and the reward - kids learning, doing well in school, and having a better chance to break the poverty cycle - is high. It's well worth the cost.
The problem is that, when free lunches are restricted to only kids who can’t afford lunch, there’s a social pressure NOT to get the free lunch. Kids don’t want to stand out as “that poor kid.” They’ll skip lunch instead of being singled out.
that's another factor--even at my school, which was extremely heterogeneous in terms of wealth, this dynamic was pretty obvious. you can't really hide that you get free lunch, because everyone's in a line with you when you pay
Given that the Republicans are nominally a Christian party, has no one in the party had a look at what Jesus taught about feeding the hungry? It is pretty clear, and it is NOT this.
The children yearn for the mines, for only the mines make them worthy of a hearty meal.
Also thank you for addressing the "but the bible is progressive akshully" bullshit. No it's not. Never has been. The new testament is less backwards, but to dismiss the old testament entirely is hypocritical and maybe even heretical. The bible is problematic if you look at it objectively, as is any form of moral prescriptivism from millennia ago.
I’m reluctant to use the word “evil”, but I can’t think of another word that accurately describes their goals and behavior. They simply hate anyone who isn’t just like them. Different race? SUFFER AND DIE. Different economic bracket? SUFFER AND DIE. Different beliefs on sexuality? SUFFER AND DIE.
They think that others are a threat to the “moral fabric” of America, but they themselves are a threat to the mere existence of millions of Americans.
Really putting evil front and center this time, huh.
I personally cannot stand the idea of children from low income househodls having something to eat
Nothing would surprise me from them, I wouldn’t be surprised if they announced wheelchair bans. For a party that openly promotes misogyny, xenophobia, homophobia, and transphobia… I wouldn’t be surprised if they went full tilt into ableism.
Give the poor nothing and we will have nothing left to lose. eyes guillotine hungrily
Literally everyone in this comment section is missing “regardless of the individual eligibility of each student”. Everyone is getting hysterical over something that isn’t even in the cards. This isn't about not feeding the poor. This is about not giving the free food you should be giving the poor to people who simply don't need it.
Of course a lot of kids rely on free school lunches and they aren’t trying to take that away. They’re trying to restrict free lunches to kids with parents who are actually incapable of feeding them. If parents can afford food for their kids, feed your fucking kids.
I would rather see my taxes go to feed every single kid in this country, poor or rich, than see another cent go into our absurdly bloated military budget, militarization of our police forces, and tax cuts for the rich. THAT is why everyone here is missing the fine print. You don't need to read between the lines to see that haggling down what little the working class has is an exercise in cruelty. It's ridiculous to penny-pinch social safety nets. Period.
what they fail to understand is that for poorer communities, kids rely on these lunches for meals when their families can't afford to buy food
No, they understand, they just don't care.
No, they understand and they care... They want the poor to be trapped by debt and struggling starting at a young age.
And they want those children to have jobs to pay for their own lunches.
"Toughen up little Suzie, you gotta get back to work if you want to eat."
Fucking psychopaths
This goes kinda well with actual stated goals of some republican representatives, who want to loosen up child labor laws.
Yes, that was my point. They're practically trying to legislate the kind of stuff that would have literally been cartoon villain conspiracies back in the 90's. It's insane that we've let them shift the discourse this far right. We're already in dystopian late-stage capitalism with crumbling public infrastructure being used as an excuse to increase giveaways of public funds to private corporations and that's just not right-wing enough.
To these people, freedom only counts if it's for the owner/capitalist/investor class. How else could we claim with a straight face to be the land of the free when we have the highest prison population per capita on the planet?
but it's their fault! /s
I think they understand, and they take pleasure in it.
I'd argue that they understand it perfectly. The cruelty is the point.
The Republican party serves the rich. Poor Republican voters are just temporarily embarrassed millionaires so they are cool with suffering themselves as long as other poor people are suffering. Other people deserve to suffer because of skin color, religion, "laziness", or whatever, so they keep voting to cut services for themselves.
Something something bootstraps.
"those deadbeat parents should've got an abortion if they can't feed their kid" --republicans probably
Very on brand for them. Especially after they denied free school lunch in North Dakota and turned around a week or so later and raised their daily meal allowance.
How dare you suggest that children and our future are more important than old millionaire boomer trolls, that uses every fiber of their being to screw everyone over so that they can have enjoy free vacations from their CEO friends?
God this is depressing. What kind of world do we live in and when will we start creating a better one?
Getting rid of current Republican office-holders would be one place to start. Voting matters, and shit like this is why.
We've been trying that for decades upon decades, haven't we? How long is it going to take? It's going to be too late for too many people if it goes on by then. Might end up being too late to deal with climate change... ~Cherri
By many accounts it's already too late. Can't stop fighting, though. It's not over until it's over.
Not sure how to though. ~Cherri
there are things you can do to start building a better world today, but it never feels like enough
yeah, but if all the kids starve to death at least the drag queens can't groom them (by existing and sometimes reading stories aloud)
Fuck your kids, billionaires need yet another tax break. -Republicans.
Careful, Republicans might take that first part literally
What a weird priority to have.
Pro-life, pro-child, pro-family values 👍🤗💖💯
Just normal GOP evil.
I imagine they twirled their mustaches and maniacally laughed while announcing this. How much more cartoonishly villainous can they get?
Have they started tying women to train tracks yet? I feel like that might be a literal next step at this point.
“Those who seek abortions will now be executed by steam-powered vehicle.”
I can just picture Ted Cruz covering his mouth and Muttley laughing while children starve.
"There is no such thing as a free lunch", they said :(
To pull more of the article into the comment section:
The Republican Study Committee (of which some three-quarters of House Republicans are members) on Wednesday released its desired 2024 budget, in which the party boldly declares its priority to eliminate the Community Eligibility Provision, or CEP, from the School Lunch Program. Why? Because “CEP allows certain schools to provide free school lunches regardless of the individual eligibility of each student.”
Of note is that the CEP is not even something every school participates in; it is a meal service program reserved for qualifying schools and districts in low-income areas. The program enables schools that predominantly serve children from low-income backgrounds to offer all students free breakfast and lunch, instead of means-testing them and having to manage collecting applications on an individual basis. As with many universal-oriented programs, it is more practically efficient and, as a bonus, lifts all boats. This is what Republicans are looking to eliminate.
It’s the kind of provision that many would want every school to participate in. Why not guarantee all our children are well fed as they learn and think about our world and their place in it, after all?
Aren't these the same people who claim that an unborn baby has every right to live, even if they're only like 4 cells and still dividing? Does like... that right to life just end once they're birthed? I really don't get how these people justify their stupidity.
“They are anti-woman.” Fucking nailed it. Carlin said this almost 30 years ago. Republicans and conservatives are evil to the core. They have not changed and will never change.
Man I miss George Carlin
It's all about keeping women scared and powerless. They don't give a flying fuck about babies.
It’s never been about the babies or family values. It’s about keeping people poor, dumbed up, and so angry at each other so they never have enough time to realize they’re being taken advantage of.
thinner kids are harder targets /s
Wow, this made me incredibly sad...
sorry, bit sarcasm is the only way I can still cope with this sh*t
Unfortunately relatable
Oh, no need to be sorry! I'm just sad at the state of the world and that's definitely not your fault. Your comment was clever, dark, and humorous. I appreciate it!
They sure do. Dumb people vote for dumb candidates.
More like dumb people vote for intelligent psychopaths.
Can we please not do the "evil is caused by mental illness" thing here? ~Cherri
and this is developed nation XD
We're not a developed nation the the US. Bring a developed nation is a moving target. As the world's idea of what it means to have a healthy and safe society progresses, a nation must progress with those standards.
The US was a developed nation, but has since failed to keep up with it's peers over the last 40 years now. We are a very wealthy nation who is rapidly rotting away at the core. Our inability to keep our people fed, healthcare available, preserve the ability for people to own homes, ensure that people have lives beyond work, and to have a route for upwards mobility all demonstrate a nation not achieving the standards set of the developed world.
We have lots of money (in total), but not a healthy and successful society.
What happened to states rights? Wasn't that the rationale of getting rid of RoweVWade? Oh yeah, that was another lie. Of course it was.
You've hit the nail on the head! States rights only apply to (insert conservative ideology here). It'll be interesting to see if book banning continues to be allowed as it's the perfect example of a law that shouldn't be legal.
Conservative beliefs in "state rights" are just as valid as they were when the Dredd decision was made. They want maximum cruelty to be imposed on the greatest number of people and will use whatever power they have to inflict it. Maybe today that's state rights while tomorrow it will be federally mandated law. Whichever path allows them to exercise their will over others is the one they will choose in the moment. Every other principle they will waffle and flip flop over, but they are always consistent on maximizing their ability to hurt innocent people.
cut Social Security and Medicare
make Trump’s tax cuts for the top 1 percent permanent
impose work requirements on “all federal benefit programs,” like food stamps and Medicare
extend work requirements on those aged 55–64
bring back all of twice-impeached and twice-arrested former President Donald Trump’s deregulations, including the weakening of environmental protection.
Well then
Does GOP actually have any goals that could be deemed objectively good?
Many of their goals are objectively good for the oil lobby and scam industries like private health insurance.
They're in favor of fucking over humanity as a whole because they just love the flavor of boot.
The one bright side of this article is that it's coming from The New Republic, which is traditionally more conservative. And the author is calling out how sad this plan is.
edit: I'm wrong? This never happens! see reply below.
Naw - TNR is a liberal but not leftist sort of magazine. It was founded by progressives back in the 20s and remains a solidly Democratic sort of magazine.
It's like they say, universal free school meals leads to a lazy population and communism.
Jokes aside, I really don't understand their fear of anything that resembles socialized programs.
They’re afraid of someone getting a free handout because they think it isn’t fair. They think they had to work hard for everything they have and that other people should suffer even more to have the same things. They’re perfectly fine bailing out banks and large companies though because those aren’t people. Huge lack of empathy and morals is the greater issue.
They THINK they had to work hard. Most of them are from a time where a one income family of 5 could actually be financially solvent.
But I thought they were so worried about the children... /s
They give free lunch to fetuses.
They are worried about the children - they're worried that they're getting free handouts from the government that will turn them into social parasites! They should be out in the wilderness hunting for their survival. Whatever happened to the good ol' days where kids worked in coal mines for 12 hours a day and lost limbs in factory accidents by the time they're 14?
More orphans for the the orphan crushing machine
The machine needs to be fed.
I am not American... But I have to say, this sounds just so comically evil it seems something only a badly written cartoon villain would say, like "I will kick all puppies and banish chocolate"
They get their votes by hurting people. It's what their base demands.
Holy shit what a bunch of heartless spineless wankers :(
Imagine caring so much about corporate profits you refuse to literally feed children. ‘Governance’. What a joke.
Literally everyone in this comment section is missing “regardless of the individual eligibility of each student”. Everyone is getting hysterical over something that isn’t even in the cards.
Of course a lot of kids rely on free school lunches and they aren’t trying to take that away. They’re trying to restrict free lunches to kids with parents who are actually incapable of feeding them. If parents can afford food for their kids, feed your fucking kids.
Technically a good point, but the text directly after your quote ... :
it is a meal service program reserved for qualifying schools and districts in low-income areas. The program enables schools that predominantly serve children from low-income backgrounds to offer all students free breakfast and lunch, instead of means-testing them and having to manage collecting applications on an individual basis. As with many universal-oriented programs, it is more practically efficient and, as a bonus, lifts all boats.
Yes, some free meals might go to kids whose parents, albeit from a low-income area, might be able to pay for it. But is that so much of a problem?
There are costs for checking for individual eligibility:
more administration
potential social stigma
some kids with "bad parents" who happen to be "too rich" might have no meal
I'm also unhappy this is fought on the back of the kids when it's actually about the money of the parents.
Of all the things to rally people around…
Children should not have to bring money to school to eat. A nutritious and tasty meal should be provided free. Their only worries in school should be whether they studied enough to pass an exam, not on their grumbling stomachs. This is dystopian garbage.
They're like a bunch of comic book villains trying to outdo each other in who can be the most abhorrent.
that's a weird priority to have... even weirder to be so proud to announce it
The cruelty is the point with Republicans. The cruelty always has been the point. The cruelty always WILL be the point.
Republicans ensuring the US will continue wandering the path to a 3rd world country.
Meanwhile, they literally get free lunch. It's some ridiculous stipend over $100 a day. Tax corporations and the 1%, no never. Starving children though, excellent idea. Can't get kick backs from a single parent who's struggling. Plus we can use the money we saved to give Uvalde another armored vehicle. That'll help the children. We are truly screwed.
Using public funds to help people? Not on the GOP's watch.
So depriving children of food is a "priority" for them. I don't know how to describe that other than "disgraceful".
Pure cruelty. Our taxes ment to be used to help people and this means more then paving roads (which in the US isn't done). I'm sick of this idea the government needs to cut spending but then they just cut social programs that is the whole point of having a government.....
I used to work for a small, family owned business. At lunch the wife of the owner was reading an article in paper and said, "90% of this school district is close enough to the poverty line that they receive free/reduced breakfast and lunch, because there's a good chance those are their only reliable meals for the week." Then she looks up from the paper and says "Can you believe that? They're giving away breakfast now, too!"
Yessh...is this a lack of compassion or empathy. I have a feeling it's the latter that cause the former. They can't see past their own lives and that lead them to think anyone that needs help isn't doing enough. Besides all that giving food for free to children shouldn't even be a issue. Hell is shouldn't matter rich or poor kids at school should just be feed. This program in the grand scheme wouldn't even cost that much (as other countries have proven)
It's worse. They enjoy hurting people. Conservatives are broken, wretched souls who delight in violence and cruelty. They're only happy when they get to watch somebody suffer, so they seek to increase the amount of suffering in the world.
They certainly didn't lack compassion. Like, if you were one of theirs, they'd give you the shirt off their back and infinite second chances. 2 of the kindest, most caring people you'd ever meet.... But yeah, they were also very capable of dehumanizing people and not giving a damn.
Compassion goes well beyond those you see as family. The fact that they actually complained about children getting free breakfast at school, of all places, proves that they weren't compassionate. They take care of the people close to them, and ONLY the people close to them.
Oh yeah I guess I should clarify that I meant to say that they're capable of displaying compassion (I've seen it). But this, obviously, was not compassion.
How tf could an actually compassionate person bend their brain to be like this? Personally helping others is ok, but doing it systematically via the state isn't?
I think it really helps if you think of some people as people and other people as "people".
Actually horrifying
They could cut military spending by like 2% and fix a whole lotta issues.
Lockheed would never allow it.
Can somebody please think off the children!!
Oh wait..
I'm just sad for the US now. Hope you guys will get better times soon.
Vote em out! not voting is complacency. Not voting is showing that this is acceptable.
I'm not saying voting is the only action needed, but it is an absolute bear minimum.
These chucklefucks always seem to choose the more expensive way of going about it in the name of saving taxpayers money. Abject morons.
WHaT iF tHat UNfeD ChILd is ThE MEssIaH
How is this a thing that people rally for? Like WTF
You see, the issue is if you spend money to guarantee children aren't going hungry then that money isn't going into the pockets of some billionaire instead. And they just can't handle that.
this is unfortunate to say the least. Its hard to decide if Republicans have been cartoon villains all along or if they just began to be more honest. Sad thing is will it even stop folks from voting for them? lmao
Profits are priority over children being able to eat, right? Makes sense to me! /s
This is just plain cruel. But I think they know that.
For a lot of kids, especially those whose families struggle financially, the free school meal is what they have to eat that day, and this would take even that away.
Horrible.
Not only that, but research in one state showed that every dollar spent on meal programs added 7 to the economy. Moreover, it leads to better education outcomes, which leads to better financial outcomes, which leads to more taxes for the government. Granted, that last one will take at least 12 years to pay off.
There is no good moral or economic reason to not have meal programs, which makes one wonder why they insist on doing it. The only ones I can think of are spite, malice, or power.
Always think about the children, except when it's something that directly impacts the lives of children.
How anyone with any empathy could ever support these politicians is beyond me.
They don’t have empathy. They have been told it is a weakness since they were children.
The cruelty truly is the point with republicans.
And I declare that voting these child-killers out of office is a 2024 priority.
Absolutely ridiculous and cruel. But not surprising for Republicans Their mindset of "I got mine, screw everybody else" is so terrible.
Why would they alienate their voter base that mainly reside in impoverished red states? A portion of those poor brainwashed right-wingers have children too.
Can you guys see the parallel with a certain spiteful CEO who is the reason for our exodus...
They know their voter base is too dumb and enraged by right wing propaganda to realize they are voting against their interests.
Yeah it seems as long as it hurts someone else they dislike they don't mind hurting themselves.
The fact that its been so normalized to be this openly shitty and callous toward frigging children... i dont even know how to react to this any more.
Im not saying its hopeless, but I feel like a lot of people on the "lets not let children go hungry" side of the fence are almost left speechless by these idiots. But i feel like thats almost part of their strategy - stunning the opposition. There has to be a better response.
What's the best way to respond to this kind of brazen cruelty? (Besides voting and campaigning for candidates who arent sociopathic).
Voting is a must. Political apathy is how this stuff happens. Outside of voting, just being vocal about your distaste for these policies might help let people around you know that not everyone supports this. And if you come face to face with someone who is outspoken in their belief that some children deserve to starve, then you know who to avoid being around.
More people voted for trump after his disastrous 4 years in office than did when he first got elected. I don't think voting is the answer because we are stupid. Educating these idiots would go a long way, but they don't believe in education. Being controlled by their extended, daily, two minute hate is all they seem to know or want.
I taught at a couple school where the majority of the students got their only 2 meals a day when at school. And these fuck heads think that's too much. It makes me sick.
Voting is the answer (at least part of the answer) because it's what kept Trump out of office for another four years despite him getting all those votes. Now even more of Gen Z is voting age, as long as they vote like they did in the midterms conservatives don't have long in office. They'll have some gerrymandered strongholds like Texas and Florida but things should slowly be getting better now that more and more of the conservative voters are dying off either from old age or COVID.
Seriously these past midterms were historic, this millennial loves Gen Z lol
That's not helping the many people being screwed over by anti-trans and anti-abortion bills, or with all of the anti-worker crap the republicans and the dems (albeit to a lesser extent) have been implementing. I'm worried it's going to be too late for a lot of people by the time things get good (not just better, actually good without 50 million horrible things going off constantly; not perfect, but not constantly under peril). Well, if they do. And of course there's the matter of climate change. I'm worried it's gonna be too late by then as well... ~Cherri
A cure all does not exist unfortunately and I don't know of any solutions for the affected minorities in those areas other than leave when possible. Which is easier said than done I know, I did it with my move out of Texas.
It likely is going to be too late for many groups of people, I don't like that reality but it's true. This is the shit situation our generation was given and we just have to do our best to improve it as best we can for future generations. We can only do that by fighting and not letting apathy take over.
Too late for what? For the environment to change? That point passed decades ago, unfortunately. We've been at the pollution game for a while. Too late to mitigate as much damage as possible? Absolutely not. The best time to plant a tree is yesterday but the next best time is today. Our planet is changing due to the actions of the old and it's on us to adapt as a society. We adapt by changing policies and we change policies by getting involved in politics, the easiest form of which is simply voting.
The future is going to be rough and certainly not what I would've chosen, but it's not untenable or unconquerable.
I mean like too late to mitigate it enough for it to not destroy the environment completely. And most of the pollution is not from individuals but from corporations. I mean hell, most pollution from airplanes comes from private jets. Commercial passenger planes don't do nearly as much damage as those (though they do quite a bit of damage and should be limited where possible). ~Cherri
Except that's not a thing, it's impossible for the environment to be completely destroyed. Even when a forest turns to desert the desert is still an environment that can be adapted to and improved on. The world as we know it will change dramatically, that's just something that's unavoidable at this point. But we can help make the next version of this world the best we can.
As long as you're alive it's never too late to take action.
A lot of species are going extinct faster than new ones are popping up. ~Cherri
Yes, that's part of the changing world. Not something I'm happy about but something we can't change. There are projects sequencing their genome so that we can hopefully clone/revive the species at a later time however. So there are things that can be done to mitigate even those changes. Not a perfect solution but it's something.
If you truly believe there's no hope and we can't do anything to change it then I implore you to follow your own word and don't bother commenting doomerisms since it doesn't help anything.
If you want to give up, fine. Just do it by yourself. I'm going to keep fighting as long as there's life in this body.
It's not that I think there's hope, it's that I don't know if there is, but I know this is something people have been trying for years with relatively little to show for it. ~Cherri
Gerrymandering should have no impact on the Senate or the Executive elections, aside from the subressive effect. We still vote for geriatric vampires more often then not, and those geriatric vampires really, really can't let the new, fresh people have positions of power. We've seen that happen over and over with those who should be stars (effective stars) in Congress. I understand completely that it's better than the fucking Republicans, but it's kind of like picking what method you're going to die from. I think you're vastly underestimating the deplorable factor in the US. For once though, finally, it does seem like these younger generations are making a hard turn to do the right thing. I hope it pays off, just on a pragmatic level I think we've already passed the point of no return so I'm just watching the world slowly burn.
I think you're underestimating the effects of old generations dying off while simultaneously a supremely motivated younger generation is coming in. I'm not saying it'll be smooth sailing and that voting alone is the answer, I'm saying we have to keep fighting and voting is part of the answer. It's not the silver bullet that will solve everything but we can't move forward with fascists in office so we have to vote them out.
It’s really hard to convince people that voting matters. And in many places, the districts are set up in such a way that it favors a certain party’s outcome.
Republicans seem to be more popular with older people, who also are more likely to be voting. Younger people are much less likely to participate.
Personally I’m pretty sick of it all myself. I still vote though. I just wish that it wasn’t all about arguments between parties and we could focus on what’s best for people.
If only the only other option weren't also trash. Then wouldn't be so much voter apathy. The system is literally designed to be this way. The US being a democratic country is a myth. The founders never even intended it to be a democracy. They just wanted it to be their own little club. Plebs were never even meant to be able to vote.
The "other side" (Democrats) are still picking your pockets and laughing with rich buddies, but they aren't for letting children go hungry, get married early and work for minimum wage in all their free time. All the while getting upset at rainbows and whatever the scapegoat of the week is.
The sad part is that for the americans to do good, they have to vote democrat. I am glad I don't live there.
We've been trying to vote and vote for decades, haven't we? When's it gonna work out? How do we make sure it's not too late for a lot of people by then, and/or too late to deal with climate change by then? ~Cherri
Not voting is not a choice, because then these bastards get even more power, it is a sad reality.
You can't get more power than all of it.
As of now democrats controll the senate.
That doesn't answer any of my questions. ~Cherri
It is working out, if I am not mistaken, each setback the republicans suffer slows them down in making the US more awful, it is just hard to notice. The political system is trapped in a two-paty-system where both parties are corporate puppets. Without a new Ross Perrot there is no hope of changing that.
So it's not working out. The way you're putting it just sounds like this is hopeless and delaying the inevitable. ~Cherri
Unless:
Civil rights movements have been succesful in the past, and letting it slip is just a waste.
Listen, this is hard thing for me to type but I think is relevant to the Republican mindset. Hundreds of children are being murdered in their classrooms. Literal murder. Of children. This is not enough to sway Republicans on gun control. If actual murder of 6 year olds doesn't have any effect on them, surely 6 year olds being hungry is not even going to make them blink. This is the reality with these people. They simply do not care about you, or your children, and everything they do is governed only by money and power.
Why do they prioritize money and power over the welfare of society? What makes them think it's a good idea? ~Cherri
Because that is the goal of any totalitarian regime. You think Putin has the welfare of his country in mind? Or Kim Jong Un? No. Money and Power is the only goal. There was an article recently on North Koreans saying how they're starving and just waiting to die. The people are simply the means to generate wealth and exercise power. Their welfare has nothing to do with it.
I used to think the Republicans were wannabe dictators, but in the last few years they've demonstrated that they are actual fascists and a dictatorship is their endgame. There is no way to deny this anymore. If people tell you who they are, you should listen to them. Republicans are no longer hiding it.
I know that's their goal but it doesn't explain why that's their goal. ~Cherri
Oh this is nothing by comparison. Republicans also vote to legalize child rape (which they preciously insist on calling "child marriage") and are trying to bring back child labor because adults are getting fed up with unfair labor practices while little kids are easier to manipulate.
I would say it would be the education of the American people. That stuff like this should be at the top of just about every news program out there.
What sucks is that most people in America, red and blue, are probably not even aware that this is happening. If more people knew what was going on then maybe things like this would stop because of either people voting these politicians out or causing so much outrage they change their minds.
Many people who don't interact with schools or kids in general don't think about them at all, except as a tax burden and a political football. It's a sickness on this country.
Chapter 1: The Power of Love Chapter 2: ...
Is a curious thing...
Wait, is that not what you meant?
Literally everyone in this comment section is missing “regardless of the individual eligibility of each student”. Everyone is getting hysterical over something that isn’t even in the cards.
Of course a lot of kids rely on free school lunches and they aren’t trying to take that away. They’re trying to restrict free lunches to kids with parents who are actually incapable of feeding them. If parents can afford food for their kids, feed your fucking kids.
I'm lefty as fuck and I still kind of empathize with people who consider themselves conservative being seriously over people characterizing literally any conservative action they take as cartoonishly evil.
And you're missing that, without the free meals being available to everyone, there's a negative social stigma to getting the free school lunches. Kids skip the meals because they don't want to be seen as "that poor kid." This leads to them going hungry, not doing well in school, and not having as many chances to break the cycle of poverty.
By opening the free school lunches to everyone, the stigma is removed. If Billy gets a free school lunch, he might be poor or his parents just might be having him get the school lunches instead of packing something. Without the social stigma, kids who need the lunches are more likely to get them and more kids are fed.
Aight, cool, but that doesn't change that this comment section is operation on the assumption that you're dealing with people who understand that and literally enjoy making children starve. This sort of characterization is rampant in politics and a total anathema to actual discussion or ever getting anything done.
Given that other Republican proposals involve keeping child marriage legal and opening child labor laws back up so that kids can work dangerous jobs without the companies involved being liable for their safety, it's not a huge leap from "Republicans want to cut free school meals" to "Republicans want kids to starve."
Maybe it's a not a 100% real leap, but it's one that the Republicans have set themselves up for.
Beyond disgusting. Keep the kids hungry so they can't learn while sitting in their underfunded classrooms. Uneducated masses ripe for the conservative picking. Can't see through their lies if you've never been taught how to think. I hate it here...
Why….. I grew up on free and reduced lunches. The return on investment here is immense.
I make six figures working at the highest levels of my career in support of government agencies. I used free/reduced lunches my entire schooling. It’s super ridiculous
Same, my property tax for this month alone will have more than paid for my entire schooling career of subsidized food.
Honestly what's an extra few hundred a year in taxes on the multiple thousands I'm already being asked to pay? Our district went free meals during covid and just kept it up. Free breakfast and lunch and there's no more stigma for getting it since it's everyone getting it.
Everyone seems happy about this, and it helps kids do better in school. Better than wasting all that food just because someone can't pay the $1-3.
Also, Republicans (supposedly) want people to get off of government assistance and earn money for themselves. You know what's a great way to do that? Get a good paying job. And a good way to get one of those is to pay attention and learn while you're in school.
However, if your family is poor and you need to skip meals, you'll be more concerned with when your next meal is. You won't pay attention and you'll have limited options to break the poverty cycle when you grow up. This leads to people still needing government assistance.
Just going from the supposed Republican talking points of "getting people off government assistance is good," free school lunches is a good idea.
And before anyone comments "just give the lunches to the kids who need them instead of everyone": Social pressure works against this. Kids don't want to stand out and being the kid that gets the free school meal is seen as a negative thing by many kids. Kids would rather skip meals than open themselves up to bullying like this. By giving free school lunches to everyone, the kids that need it can get their lunches without any social stigma.
Along with funding for libraries, I think free school lunches are a great use of taxpayer money!
Don't you know? The only necessary welfare is mine
https://youtu.be/eyGND49CBYk
british comic stuart lee on the subject.
Why? Assuming this is not a rhetorical question, it follows directly from the core authoritarian principle of Conservatism in the U.S.: Moral Hierarchy. That is to say, Those who rule are privileged above those who serve, and this is the basis of a ranked ever-swelling staircase of privilege.
Any action or policy that supports the hierarchy is divine, and whatever threatens the hierarchy is evil. Free food, or food as a right, is antithetical to Conservatism because it diminishes a key point of leverage held by rulers going up the chain. When a person is fed, they are less inclined to honor the privilege of their supposed rulers. When a person is truly hungry, they are highly motivated to submit, and even to support the hierarchy that provides them with any limited access to food.
In this philosophy, the ROI of free lunch is negative. The same argument applies to most forms of welfare.
The cruelty is the point.
Obviously being nice to 1 person just leads to communism! I'll bet you now believe that people should have access to food, clean water, clean air, health care, and shelter as well? DON'T YOU!?
I do as well. :-)
Same here, kept me fed during my high school years. Don’t know what I would’ve done without it.
Gosh... Just imagine that not guaranteeing a meal to children, preventing them from eating in some cases, is what you want more than anything.
Simply blows my mind.
These people jerk off to the idea of hurting children. Every new policy Republicans come up with, whether its supporting
child marriagelegalized rape with 12 year olds or trying to bring back child labor, or making children too hungry to learn anything in school, makes their "moral" panic over a bunch of people who happen to be wearing dresses reading to kids even more hypocritical. Honestly I think it's the idea of children being functionally literate that probably terrifies them the most.Malnutrition leads to developmental delays. Poor academic performance in early years means they're less likely to go to college, and ma not even finish high school. This helps create the next generation of wage slaves that are required for capitalism to survive.
In other words, working as designed.
Why design it like that though? And I know someone's going to say "money and power and evil" or something but that just pushes the question further back. ~Cherri
Why aren't they self aware enough to realize they sound like cartoon villains?
They are appealing to their voters who want them to "hurt the right people"
Why do their voters want them to "hurt the right people" in the first place? And why do they go along with it rather than trying to persuade them not to or targeting a different demographic or anything else? ~Cherri
There is a free book by a psychologist out there called The Authoritarians which might help explain it.
I keep hoping that their voters finally see them for what they are, but well, I guess they do and that's the point...
You know, I try to keep an open mind and try to understand how the other side could come to the conclusions they do, but sometimes they really make it difficult. I genuinely don't get how this could be construed as anything other than malicious. What's the benefit in this? How is this "thinking of the children?" How did a political party come to represent views that are so aggressively anti-humanity? It's such a bizarre platform to attach yourself to so proudly and openly.
Sometime there is no rationality in those people/political party, they exist just to be destructive and promote hatred no matter the reason.
They wanted to promote child marriage.
They wanted to rape children and get away with it by forcing them to marry them.
They wanted to take out PPP loan on younger generations and tell them to go and fucking die.
They wanted to deny student loan relief, even if there are provable economic boon in doing so, because they exist to hate people no matter what.
They want to ban abortion without giving any exception even for raped victim or a miscarriage.
I could go on and on and on about it. Sometime, there is no reasoning with monsters and they need to be destroyed, period.
It's insane seeing how they've built themselves on a platform of strictly hate. It seems like they're never for things only against things. Well I guess outside of the child marriage thing seems they're pretty for that. It's so strange to me that in 2023 the republican party has regressed into essentially a draconian early industrial revolution era roll back of rights. I mean they're even repealing child labor laws. It's literally like they want to remove all progress from the last couple centuries. It blows my mind that this is acceptable in our country in the era.
It's because conservatism is fundamentally reactionary. They don't seem to be professing any particular ideology because they aren't. They never have. It's always been about opposing the ideology of others.
It's also why it's so insidious. You can't pin down someone who doesn't believe in anything.
I’d add to that and say conservatism is an inherently selfish ideology, in addition to reactionary. Every conservative policy, and every value they proclaim, is firmly founded in looking out for one’s self at the expense of their community.
Ah, student loans are, in fact, a problem. One-time relief of student debts is a good thing - provided there are no new debts on such a scale and the mechanism changes after that.
Charity sponsorship of students is a good thing without doubt. Private stipends are a good thing. But when loans which are not going to be returned in a normal way are becoming that common, then something is wrong and should be fixed, not poured more money into.
They are a cause of inflation in education (which, of course, harms the students as well), of people like AOC talking and being listened about economics, because on paper they would be qualified, and so on.
It's really quite shocking how the GOP agenda can be predicted by asking yourself, "What's the worst thing someone would in a given situation?". What's even more shocking is that they have engineered the political framework to disproportionately grant them enough power to sometimes pass these regressive policies. But for most of America, sigh, just another Thursday...
What's crazy to me is it seems like they just want children to suffer. They want to force women to give birth, but then don't give a shit about what happens to the children after. On top of that, it's like they are trying to make them suffer even more for their parents being unable to provide.
I could somewhat get attacking programs for adults. Still disagree, but I guess it's the "they should be able to provide for themselves" mentality. But then doing this for children when they are literally unable to provide for themselves or have any responsibility for being hungry. Yes, let's make the helpless children suffer.
Disgusting times we live in.
They want to force children into the labor pool. Can't afford to eat? Get a job Timmy! Oh and by the way if you don't pay your school lunch debt, we're calling CPS and taking you away from your parents. So get to work!
They see poor people as inherently bad parents. They want ways to take away poor minority children from their parents, and lunch debt is a great way to get them on the radar for that.
And where do they intend to place them once they get an excuse to break up the family?
I think the rich well adjusted foster family is largely a TV creation.
Maybe they'll just straight turn group homes into factories.
They're not even bothering to lie any more, and yet everyone still votes for them.
You know that scene in Final Fantasy 8 where Edea announces her evil plan to a huge crowd and calls them morons and they all clap and cheer? This is like that.
imagine being in the strategy meeting with your team, when they suggest a play based on suspending withdrawing food from child would go well with your voters.
imagine agreeing to go with it. getting a speech written about it and one day standing at the lectern to say in front of crowd of assembled people "it is not our responsiblity to feed children". and then pausing for applause and going home and telling your spouse, "today went great".
in this supply chain of inhumanity, there were so many opportunities for the heart to say "yo...something is off here.....cant quite put my finger on it.......but it doesnt seem.....right ?."
to sail through all those checkpoints of human decency, and go through with it, is nothing less than psychopathy.
The horrifying thing is that there are people out there who will consider it the right thing to do.
“It’s not enough that I should eat, children should starve. “ -the gop.
Either that or "I don't believe that anyone is starving. I just ate a large lunch so obviously nobody is going hungry."
They only recognize that something is real when it affects them personally. If it doesn't then they'll either claim the thing doesn't exist or will say it's that person's fault that they are going through that (likely for being "too lazy" to pull themselves up by their bootstraps).
Exactly. Same energy as "I made a snowball in January so obviously global warming doesn't exist and neither does the sun by the way." Weaponized incompetence at the object permanence level.
If it was just apathy, they wouldn't be going out of their way like this to make it worse. ~Cherri
They care about children until they’re born then they want nothing to do with them. Oh wait they also use children to pass anti lgbt legislation.
And prop up the work force.
How did this get normalized? Why is this even something that is even considered debatable? As a society, feeding our children should be the first priority.
I'm flubbered.
Echo chambers that reinforce the lie that democrats want to take your money to pay for irresponsible people’s children.
Maybe they are irresponsible, but that's not their kids fault. Feeding kids regardless of who their parents are, is a basic morality thing.
But that is the whole point of this. These people making and advocating for this kind of stuff are abusers. The GOP is a pro-abuse party. We need to stop pretending otherwise. The goal is to enable abusers. When these people talk about "parental rights" that is what they mean. They believe they have a right to abuse their kids including starving them. They also believe that anyone who tries to assist their children—even so much as feeding them—is interfering with their right as a parent.
I know this because my step-dad was exactly of this type of mindset when I was a kid. They don't see children as having rights or dignity. They are just property of their parents with zero personage to them. Food insecurity even when the parents have the ability to feed their children is used as a form of control. "If you won't do as we say you won't eat" was very much a thing in my household and a lot of others I knew growing up.
Allowing free breakfast and lunch at school usurps their ability to use hunger and starvation as a punishment. I know it's dark but it's worth noting.
the unplanned kids that arrived under anti abortion laws.
Why do they want the children to suffer for it though??? ~Cherri
i understand its a bullshit argument, but even if were true, idgaf why kids dont have food, i want them to get food one way or another
Well, sweeping chimneys and working night shifts in abattoirs is a good way of acquiring the money for it!
/S
Literally everyone in this comment section is missing “regardless of the individual eligibility of each student”. Everyone is getting hysterical over something that isn’t even in the cards.
Of course a lot of kids rely on free school lunches and they aren’t trying to take that away. They’re trying to restrict free lunches to kids with parents who are actually incapable of feeding them. If parents can afford food for their kids, feed your fucking kids.
I'm admittedly not familiar with how the program works but I suspect that "totally bulletproof and unbiased eligibility criteria that can't / won't be weaponized against specific people groups" isn't something that it guarantees
Tearing down women's rights. Ruining queer people's life, especially trans people. Making sure children can't eat for free. Wow. Quite the priorities over at the Republican party.
I'm not American, I've just been looking from afar for a long time now. But from everything I'm seeing... it feels like they're going to be in for quite the rude awakening in 2024.
Unless you're Russian, you probably aren't familiar with living in the kind of media environment we have which can cause these clearly absurd ideas to seem normal for people to have. This lunacy is within our overton window. Centrists think it's about half right. Liberals think it's wrong but more or less fair to hold these views. A younger and further left contingent which has almost no representation in the government (because we put elecrions upnfor sale in 2010 with Citizens United) but is growing is the only group who finds this kind of thing completely unacceptable.
These are the same people who can expense up to $79 per day for food and drink. They're fine taking hand outs, they just don't want you to have any.
My Daily Reminder that this is a gold plated dystopia.
The second gilded age. And I'm not sure it will end as peacefully as the first.
Just evil… no nuance needed.
Yes. it just breaks my heart that people seem to have a goal to make the lives of the vulnerable as hard as possible.
The whole point in these kind of moves is to cause congestion and exhaustion in political movement.
It’s a struggle to campaign for actual improvements when we’re all stuck fighting garbage like this all the time.
It’s deliberate obstruction and a standard GOP play
What. The. Fuck. Is wrong. With. These people?
I've been thinking about this a lot. I'm absolutely not a psychologist, psychiatrist, or anything similar, but it's starting to show that all of them have forgotten where they came from or the stories of where their family members came from. Most of these people were raised by Depression-Era parents who, without exaggeration, suffered and died due to lack of affordable food options. I'm sure some Republicans even experienced that same problem themselves in their childhood.
I used to believe the ignorance of how important providing basic nutrition to the next generation is was based on a lack of life experience, and that may be true for some, but there's no way every single one of them has no surface-level knowledge of true hardship. They have heard about it, read about it, and some have witnessed it firsthand.
So to answer the question, it's either a part of some long-term plan to control the public for their means (which is evil) or they are selfish pricks (which when you are in government, makes you evil). Unfortunately, it's looking like both.
It's just cruel. A disgusting, cruel mindset from those who genuinely just want to hurt others.
Anyone supporting this lacks the most basic of morals. There is no excuse for this.
it's a weird mindset.
Literally everyone in this comment section is missing “regardless of the individual eligibility of each student”. Everyone is getting hysterical over something that isn’t even in the cards.
Of course a lot of kids rely on free school lunches and they aren’t trying to take that away. They’re trying to restrict free lunches to kids with parents who are actually incapable of feeding them. If parents can afford food for their kids, feed your fucking kids.
i honestly have to ask here: who cares if the children of people who can afford to feed their kids benefit from this policy? means testing is dumb in basically all circumstances, you can't count on parents to do this (and if a child goes to school without a lunch they should still be able to eat!), and even if you don't care about those considerations the policy as a whole is basically a budgetary rounding error. this isn't the F-35 program, your tax dollars aren't being thrown into a black hole because someone with an income of $100,000 has a child also being fed by universal school lunch.
If you want to make that argument, great! I pretty much agree. What's deeply upsetting to me is that this entire comment section is willfully misrepresenting the move as "haha they want children to starve". I guarantee you that everyone here will also claim to be super concerned about how far political rifts have become. Republicans do a lot of awful shit but this is just choosing to characterize people as deeply cruel villains for the sake of entertainment. I can't blame "casual conservatives" from looking at responses like this and deciding that their characterization of the left as overzealous is completely true.
okay but they kinda do. you are giving charitability to people (Republican politicians in Congress) who have clearly demonstrated they do not deserve it and that what they want is for people to be worse off--whether they accept that or not. more children starving because free school meals are restricted to certain income groups is possibly the most straightforward cause-and-effect outcome there can be. the benefits of having them (without means testing) are also undisputable. we literally just had those for two years without issue during the pandemic.
No, see, this is a willful mischaracterization of their ignorance. These are people who are convinced that parents who can afford their feed their children just will if they lack other options. The idea that some would simply choose not to anyways or that means testing is often faulty is further than they've ever actually thought about it. Still cartoonishly evil? Yeah, but it's not "haha I sure do love kids not eating", it's a lack of empathy of a different sort. Telling people that they want children to starve when that's the last thing that probably crossed their mind will never, ever sway someone's understanding of a problem. It will only convince them that your position is based on a strawman. We need to appeal to people's sense that they're good people who want to do good things.
too bad? literally just don't advocate for policy that'll starve children if you don't want to be accused of making children starve--again, we had universal, non-means tested meals in this arena for two years and nobody complained about it then. if you're the type of person who objects now, i don't think that's worth coddling--i think it's worth begin honest, which is that it's a policy that leads to more starving children and it's a deeply inhuman policy overall. you should feel bad for agreeing with it as a person.
as for this legislatively: me trying to nicely appeal to a Republican legislator is never going to make them see reason here and not starve children. these people are bad, their policy is worse, and trying to coddle them in particular is a waste of time. they know what they're doing.
This whole reply makes me even more negative towards the future of humanity than I was. Discourse like this is exactly why things are as bad as they are.
The problem is that, when free lunches are restricted to only kids who can't afford lunch, there's a social pressure NOT to get the free lunch. Kids don't want to stand out as "that poor kid." They'll skip lunch instead of being singled out.
Free lunches for everyone fixes this. Kids can't tell if Jimmy is getting the free lunch because his parents didn't pack him one or because his parents can't afford to feed him. The cost to feed the kids is low and the reward - kids learning, doing well in school, and having a better chance to break the poverty cycle - is high. It's well worth the cost.
that's another factor--even at my school, which was extremely heterogeneous in terms of wealth, this dynamic was pretty obvious. you can't really hide that you get free lunch, because everyone's in a line with you when you pay
Given that the Republicans are nominally a Christian party, has no one in the party had a look at what Jesus taught about feeding the hungry? It is pretty clear, and it is NOT this.
The problem is, they're ignoring Matthew 25:35 in favor of 2 Thessalonians 3:10.
The children yearn for the mines, for only the mines make them worthy of a hearty meal.
Also thank you for addressing the "but the bible is progressive akshully" bullshit. No it's not. Never has been. The new testament is less backwards, but to dismiss the old testament entirely is hypocritical and maybe even heretical. The bible is problematic if you look at it objectively, as is any form of moral prescriptivism from millennia ago.
I’m reluctant to use the word “evil”, but I can’t think of another word that accurately describes their goals and behavior. They simply hate anyone who isn’t just like them. Different race? SUFFER AND DIE. Different economic bracket? SUFFER AND DIE. Different beliefs on sexuality? SUFFER AND DIE.
They think that others are a threat to the “moral fabric” of America, but they themselves are a threat to the mere existence of millions of Americans.
Really putting evil front and center this time, huh.
I personally cannot stand the idea of children from low income househodls having something to eat
Nothing would surprise me from them, I wouldn’t be surprised if they announced wheelchair bans. For a party that openly promotes misogyny, xenophobia, homophobia, and transphobia… I wouldn’t be surprised if they went full tilt into ableism.
Give the poor nothing and we will have nothing left to lose. eyes guillotine hungrily
Literally everyone in this comment section is missing “regardless of the individual eligibility of each student”. Everyone is getting hysterical over something that isn’t even in the cards. This isn't about not feeding the poor. This is about not giving the free food you should be giving the poor to people who simply don't need it.
Of course a lot of kids rely on free school lunches and they aren’t trying to take that away. They’re trying to restrict free lunches to kids with parents who are actually incapable of feeding them. If parents can afford food for their kids, feed your fucking kids.
I would rather see my taxes go to feed every single kid in this country, poor or rich, than see another cent go into our absurdly bloated military budget, militarization of our police forces, and tax cuts for the rich. THAT is why everyone here is missing the fine print. You don't need to read between the lines to see that haggling down what little the working class has is an exercise in cruelty. It's ridiculous to penny-pinch social safety nets. Period.
what they fail to understand is that for poorer communities, kids rely on these lunches for meals when their families can't afford to buy food
No, they understand, they just don't care.
No, they understand and they care... They want the poor to be trapped by debt and struggling starting at a young age.
And they want those children to have jobs to pay for their own lunches.
"Toughen up little Suzie, you gotta get back to work if you want to eat."
Fucking psychopaths
This goes kinda well with actual stated goals of some republican representatives, who want to loosen up child labor laws.
Yes, that was my point. They're practically trying to legislate the kind of stuff that would have literally been cartoon villain conspiracies back in the 90's. It's insane that we've let them shift the discourse this far right. We're already in dystopian late-stage capitalism with crumbling public infrastructure being used as an excuse to increase giveaways of public funds to private corporations and that's just not right-wing enough.
To these people, freedom only counts if it's for the owner/capitalist/investor class. How else could we claim with a straight face to be the land of the free when we have the highest prison population per capita on the planet?
but it's their fault! /s
I think they understand, and they take pleasure in it.
I'd argue that they understand it perfectly. The cruelty is the point.
The Republican party serves the rich. Poor Republican voters are just temporarily embarrassed millionaires so they are cool with suffering themselves as long as other poor people are suffering. Other people deserve to suffer because of skin color, religion, "laziness", or whatever, so they keep voting to cut services for themselves.
Something something bootstraps.
"those deadbeat parents should've got an abortion if they can't feed their kid" --republicans probably
Very on brand for them. Especially after they denied free school lunch in North Dakota and turned around a week or so later and raised their daily meal allowance.
How dare you suggest that children and our future are more important than old millionaire boomer trolls, that uses every fiber of their being to screw everyone over so that they can have enjoy free vacations from their CEO friends?
God this is depressing. What kind of world do we live in and when will we start creating a better one?
Getting rid of current Republican office-holders would be one place to start. Voting matters, and shit like this is why.
We've been trying that for decades upon decades, haven't we? How long is it going to take? It's going to be too late for too many people if it goes on by then. Might end up being too late to deal with climate change... ~Cherri
By many accounts it's already too late. Can't stop fighting, though. It's not over until it's over.
Not sure how to though. ~Cherri
there are things you can do to start building a better world today, but it never feels like enough
Attention conservatives: you can't
marrylegally rape children or force them into child labor if you already starved them to death first.yeah, but if all the kids starve to death at least the drag queens can't groom them (by existing and sometimes reading stories aloud)
Fuck your kids, billionaires need yet another tax break. -Republicans.
Careful, Republicans might take that first part literally
What a weird priority to have.
Pro-life, pro-child, pro-family values 👍🤗💖💯
Just normal GOP evil.
I imagine they twirled their mustaches and maniacally laughed while announcing this. How much more cartoonishly villainous can they get?
Have they started tying women to train tracks yet? I feel like that might be a literal next step at this point.
“Those who seek abortions will now be executed by steam-powered vehicle.”
I can just picture Ted Cruz covering his mouth and Muttley laughing while children starve.
"There is no such thing as a free lunch", they said :(
To pull more of the article into the comment section:
Aren't these the same people who claim that an unborn baby has every right to live, even if they're only like 4 cells and still dividing? Does like... that right to life just end once they're birthed? I really don't get how these people justify their stupidity.
Relevant George Carlin
“They are anti-woman.” Fucking nailed it. Carlin said this almost 30 years ago. Republicans and conservatives are evil to the core. They have not changed and will never change.
Man I miss George Carlin
It's all about keeping women scared and powerless. They don't give a flying fuck about babies.
It’s never been about the babies or family values. It’s about keeping people poor, dumbed up, and so angry at each other so they never have enough time to realize they’re being taken advantage of.
thinner kids are harder targets /s
Wow, this made me incredibly sad...
sorry, bit sarcasm is the only way I can still cope with this sh*t
Unfortunately relatable
Oh, no need to be sorry! I'm just sad at the state of the world and that's definitely not your fault. Your comment was clever, dark, and humorous. I appreciate it!
They sure do. Dumb people vote for dumb candidates.
More like dumb people vote for intelligent psychopaths.
Can we please not do the "evil is caused by mental illness" thing here? ~Cherri
and this is developed nation XD
We're not a developed nation the the US. Bring a developed nation is a moving target. As the world's idea of what it means to have a healthy and safe society progresses, a nation must progress with those standards.
The US was a developed nation, but has since failed to keep up with it's peers over the last 40 years now. We are a very wealthy nation who is rapidly rotting away at the core. Our inability to keep our people fed, healthcare available, preserve the ability for people to own homes, ensure that people have lives beyond work, and to have a route for upwards mobility all demonstrate a nation not achieving the standards set of the developed world.
We have lots of money (in total), but not a healthy and successful society.
What happened to states rights? Wasn't that the rationale of getting rid of RoweVWade? Oh yeah, that was another lie. Of course it was.
You've hit the nail on the head! States rights only apply to (insert conservative ideology here). It'll be interesting to see if book banning continues to be allowed as it's the perfect example of a law that shouldn't be legal.
Conservative beliefs in "state rights" are just as valid as they were when the Dredd decision was made. They want maximum cruelty to be imposed on the greatest number of people and will use whatever power they have to inflict it. Maybe today that's state rights while tomorrow it will be federally mandated law. Whichever path allows them to exercise their will over others is the one they will choose in the moment. Every other principle they will waffle and flip flop over, but they are always consistent on maximizing their ability to hurt innocent people.
Well then
Does GOP actually have any goals that could be deemed objectively good?
Many of their goals are objectively good for the oil lobby and scam industries like private health insurance.
They're in favor of fucking over humanity as a whole because they just love the flavor of boot.
The one bright side of this article is that it's coming from The New Republic, which is traditionally more conservative. And the author is calling out how sad this plan is.
edit: I'm wrong? This never happens! see reply below.
Naw - TNR is a liberal but not leftist sort of magazine. It was founded by progressives back in the 20s and remains a solidly Democratic sort of magazine.
It's like they say, universal free school meals leads to a lazy population and communism.
Jokes aside, I really don't understand their fear of anything that resembles socialized programs.
They’re afraid of someone getting a free handout because they think it isn’t fair. They think they had to work hard for everything they have and that other people should suffer even more to have the same things. They’re perfectly fine bailing out banks and large companies though because those aren’t people. Huge lack of empathy and morals is the greater issue.
They THINK they had to work hard. Most of them are from a time where a one income family of 5 could actually be financially solvent.
But I thought they were so worried about the children... /s
They give free lunch to fetuses.
They are worried about the children - they're worried that they're getting free handouts from the government that will turn them into social parasites! They should be out in the wilderness hunting for their survival. Whatever happened to the good ol' days where kids worked in coal mines for 12 hours a day and lost limbs in factory accidents by the time they're 14?
More orphans for the the orphan crushing machine
The machine needs to be fed.
I am not American... But I have to say, this sounds just so comically evil it seems something only a badly written cartoon villain would say, like "I will kick all puppies and banish chocolate"
They get their votes by hurting people. It's what their base demands.
Holy shit what a bunch of heartless spineless wankers :(
Imagine caring so much about corporate profits you refuse to literally feed children. ‘Governance’. What a joke.
Literally everyone in this comment section is missing “regardless of the individual eligibility of each student”. Everyone is getting hysterical over something that isn’t even in the cards.
Of course a lot of kids rely on free school lunches and they aren’t trying to take that away. They’re trying to restrict free lunches to kids with parents who are actually incapable of feeding them. If parents can afford food for their kids, feed your fucking kids.
Technically a good point, but the text directly after your quote ... :
Yes, some free meals might go to kids whose parents, albeit from a low-income area, might be able to pay for it. But is that so much of a problem?
There are costs for checking for individual eligibility:
I'm also unhappy this is fought on the back of the kids when it's actually about the money of the parents.
Of all the things to rally people around…
Children should not have to bring money to school to eat. A nutritious and tasty meal should be provided free. Their only worries in school should be whether they studied enough to pass an exam, not on their grumbling stomachs. This is dystopian garbage.
They're like a bunch of comic book villains trying to outdo each other in who can be the most abhorrent.
that's a weird priority to have... even weirder to be so proud to announce it
The cruelty is the point with Republicans. The cruelty always has been the point. The cruelty always WILL be the point.
Republicans ensuring the US will continue wandering the path to a 3rd world country.
Meanwhile, they literally get free lunch. It's some ridiculous stipend over $100 a day. Tax corporations and the 1%, no never. Starving children though, excellent idea. Can't get kick backs from a single parent who's struggling. Plus we can use the money we saved to give Uvalde another armored vehicle. That'll help the children. We are truly screwed.
Using public funds to help people? Not on the GOP's watch.
So depriving children of food is a "priority" for them. I don't know how to describe that other than "disgraceful".
Pure cruelty. Our taxes ment to be used to help people and this means more then paving roads (which in the US isn't done). I'm sick of this idea the government needs to cut spending but then they just cut social programs that is the whole point of having a government.....
I used to work for a small, family owned business. At lunch the wife of the owner was reading an article in paper and said, "90% of this school district is close enough to the poverty line that they receive free/reduced breakfast and lunch, because there's a good chance those are their only reliable meals for the week." Then she looks up from the paper and says "Can you believe that? They're giving away breakfast now, too!"
Yessh...is this a lack of compassion or empathy. I have a feeling it's the latter that cause the former. They can't see past their own lives and that lead them to think anyone that needs help isn't doing enough. Besides all that giving food for free to children shouldn't even be a issue. Hell is shouldn't matter rich or poor kids at school should just be feed. This program in the grand scheme wouldn't even cost that much (as other countries have proven)
It's worse. They enjoy hurting people. Conservatives are broken, wretched souls who delight in violence and cruelty. They're only happy when they get to watch somebody suffer, so they seek to increase the amount of suffering in the world.
They certainly didn't lack compassion. Like, if you were one of theirs, they'd give you the shirt off their back and infinite second chances. 2 of the kindest, most caring people you'd ever meet.... But yeah, they were also very capable of dehumanizing people and not giving a damn.
Compassion goes well beyond those you see as family. The fact that they actually complained about children getting free breakfast at school, of all places, proves that they weren't compassionate. They take care of the people close to them, and ONLY the people close to them.
Oh yeah I guess I should clarify that I meant to say that they're capable of displaying compassion (I've seen it). But this, obviously, was not compassion.
How tf could an actually compassionate person bend their brain to be like this? Personally helping others is ok, but doing it systematically via the state isn't?
I think it really helps if you think of some people as people and other people as "people".
Actually horrifying
They could cut military spending by like 2% and fix a whole lotta issues.
Lockheed would never allow it.
Can somebody please think off the children!!
Oh wait..
I'm just sad for the US now. Hope you guys will get better times soon.
Vote em out! not voting is complacency. Not voting is showing that this is acceptable.
I'm not saying voting is the only action needed, but it is an absolute bear minimum.
These chucklefucks always seem to choose the more expensive way of going about it in the name of saving taxpayers money. Abject morons.
WHaT iF tHat UNfeD ChILd is ThE MEssIaH
How is this a thing that people rally for? Like WTF
You see, the issue is if you spend money to guarantee children aren't going hungry then that money isn't going into the pockets of some billionaire instead. And they just can't handle that.
this is unfortunate to say the least. Its hard to decide if Republicans have been cartoon villains all along or if they just began to be more honest. Sad thing is will it even stop folks from voting for them? lmao
Profits are priority over children being able to eat, right? Makes sense to me! /s
This is just plain cruel. But I think they know that.
For a lot of kids, especially those whose families struggle financially, the free school meal is what they have to eat that day, and this would take even that away.
Horrible.
Not only that, but research in one state showed that every dollar spent on meal programs added 7 to the economy. Moreover, it leads to better education outcomes, which leads to better financial outcomes, which leads to more taxes for the government. Granted, that last one will take at least 12 years to pay off.
There is no good moral or economic reason to not have meal programs, which makes one wonder why they insist on doing it. The only ones I can think of are spite, malice, or power.
Always think about the children, except when it's something that directly impacts the lives of children.
How anyone with any empathy could ever support these politicians is beyond me.
They don’t have empathy. They have been told it is a weakness since they were children.
The cruelty truly is the point with republicans.
And I declare that voting these child-killers out of office is a 2024 priority.
Absolutely ridiculous and cruel. But not surprising for Republicans Their mindset of "I got mine, screw everybody else" is so terrible.
Why would they alienate their voter base that mainly reside in impoverished red states? A portion of those poor brainwashed right-wingers have children too.
Can you guys see the parallel with a certain spiteful CEO who is the reason for our exodus...
They know their voter base is too dumb and enraged by right wing propaganda to realize they are voting against their interests.
Yeah it seems as long as it hurts someone else they dislike they don't mind hurting themselves.
Demons