It makes one wonder.
How deficient in charity and understanding can a man be to propose singling out poor kids so that their unfortunate circumstances, over which they have no control, will mark them for ridicule in front of their classmates. Ebenezer Scrooge would have been proud to belong to the same group this tin-headed Congressnutter belongs to. And yes, the Congressnutter has an "R" after his name.
Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Scrooge) wants to teach poor hungry kids a lesson, because coming from a deprived and possibly abusive household isn't instructive enough on how miserable life can be when you're a child. Kingston believes making poor hungry kids sweep floors and drop nickles or a dimes in a bucket will teach them something or other. I'm pretty sure his proposals won't teach any of them "Good Will Toward Men."
"For I was an hungry, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in." (And I didn't have to sweep the floors and scrounge around in my pockets for change!)
Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA), who from 2011 to 2012 chaired the House Appropriations subcommittee that oversees funding for school nutrition programs, told party activists that kids receiving free breakfast and lunch should either be asked to pay for part of their meals or earn them by sweeping the floor.
The 11-term Congressman, who is seeking his party’s nomination for an open U.S. Senate seat next year, said Saturday that he had suggested the idea to Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack.
KINGSTON: On the Agriculture Committee, we have jurisdiction over the school lunch. [The] school lunch program has a 16 percent error rate. [The] school lunch program is very expensive. Of course, it looks good compared to the school breakfast program that has a 25 percent error rate. But one of the things I’m talking to the Secretary of Agriculture about: why don’t you have the kids pay a dime, pay a nickle, to instill in them that there is, in fact, no such thing as a free lunch. Or maybe sweep the floor in the cafeteria. And yes, I understand that that would be an administrative problem and I understand that it would probably lose you money — but think what we’d gain as a society in getting the myth out of their head that there is such thing as a free lunch.
Kingston follows in the footsteps of his former colleague, then-Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO), who argued in his own unsuccessful 2012 Senate campaign that the federal government should “end its support for school lunch programs,” because they he believes the program unconstitutional. Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT) also argued that it is unconstitutional for the federal government to feed poor students. Another former colleague from Georgia, ex-Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (R), suggested in his unsuccessful 2012 presidential campaign that kids should become assistant janitors.
The GOP's solution for dealing with childhood hunger?
Child Janitors!
"Are there no prisons; are there no workhouses?"
Bah! Humbug!
35 comments:
Kingston believes making poor hungry kids sweep floors and drop nickles or a dimes in a bucket will teach them something or other.
Are there no prisons?
Are there no workhouses?
Tod Akin, wasn't he in the news for something else?
If they had to admit there are structural problems in the economy rather than believing that the poor just deserve it, there whole belief system would fall.
Kingston want poor kids to sweep school floors for their food? Excellent idea! Also, make sure they have to wear special uniforms so everyone knows who the poor kids are, and make sure that the non-poor kids throw things on the floor for the poor kids to clean up, then they can point and laugh at them.
If enough of them commit suicide that will help end poverty. Right GOP??
The scary thing is that ideas like this have been floating around the far-right for years. However, no one in their right mind would ever mention an idea like this publicly. Ideas like this one were reserved for late-night, drunken confessions at GOP dinner parties.
But, unfortunately, the GOP's base has become so consumed with rage, hate, and fear for the scary dark-skinned fella in the White House, and for the fact that they are now a shrinking minority, they barely even pay attention or know the kind of ideas which are being spun out by their party of choice...And, its not like you can tell them otherwise since they don't believe in facts, science, or reality.
The irony in all of this is of course that such a proposal would vastly effect folks who live in red states far more than the ones in blue ones.
Among the 254 counties were food stamp recipients doubled between 2007 and 2011, Mitt Romney won 213 of them in last years election.
The dastardly "47%" in which the GOP sit around the fire and tell ghost stories about during their little "retreats" is in fact the base of the Republican Party.
Make poor kids sweep the floors? That will teach them! But what will it teach them? That the rich are assholes and worthy of hate!
Some solution GOP. Well, they are the party of hate, so what should we expect?
Child labor, indentured servitude, feudalism: Today's GOP.
It is a far better lesson to teach them that they don't have to work for anything and they should be happy with a career living off public assistance. How dare someone try to instill pride into these children, what were they thinking.
This is like asking a healthy adult to get a job and get off welfare, cruel and unusual punishment and they may get some self esteem.
mr duckpoop
There is a structural problem in the economy, it's called the obama policy leading from behind.
Hope he shoots well in Hawaii and comes back relaxed.
skudrunner, exactly what do you teach a child who is poor, through no fault of her own, when you single her out as an object of ridicule by making her into a janitor? Do you have any idea of how cruel children can be? Why do you think it should be a child's job to earn food when it is not their fault that they are poor?
Where is your head, for gawdsake?
You have the typical rightwing disease of blaming the victim, especially when that victim is a child.
You have a miserly and, IMO, a wretched heart.
You come here and tell us that poor hungry kids need to be charwomen and men so that they can eat and learn some lesson about not taking all the time?
Have you ever, EVER, suggested that all the other entities that accept government subsidies [farmers, oil companies, etc., grovel for them as you suggest poor hungry kids should?
What a perfectly nasty outlook you have for those who are hungry and poor.
Scrooge indeed.
Mr. Crud Scum,
How is it instilling pride in these children when you treat them like garbage, punish innocent children for their poverty, make sure they bow and scrape and don't get too uppity by making them sweep the floor ... making sure they and their kind feel like second-class citizens undeserving of respect or an ounce of human dignity.
Typical inbred, neo-confederate, racist bullshit! Your offensive comment deserves another thrown back in your face.
"... indentured servitude, feudalism..."
Just my opinion but both parties are heading us in the same direction and to the same end.
It is more a question which one will get us to the same same end the fastest. My obsrvations (opinions) are that the GOP will be in the front position when we get there.
No party today is truly concerned with the middle class, however the class ends are well represented.
We need a couple of political parties that are concerned with and have real ideas and an agenda to kick start growth that will lead to rebuilding the middle class. Society will collapse economically when there is only the wealthy and the poor and working poor.
I know and have met a lot of decent, caring, concerned, family minded individuals in both the republican party and the demecratic party that do not reflect the views of the lockstep politicians in their respective party.
A note to Jerry, Hate ultimately consumes the hater, it rarely consumes the hated.
So skud's ideal is embodied in Scrooge's lament "Are there no prisons; are there no workhouses" before Scrooge had his epiphany on what it means to be a true Christion, recognizing that we should take care of one another without demeaning the needy.
The conservatives in this country want the poor to feel humiliated for taking assistance from the government no matter what the circumstances, and yet look at the massive assistance programs that exist for corporations and hedge-fund managers, with their special tax deals--not to mention failed presidential candidates who stuff their money in overseas bank accounts so that YOU, skud, have to make up for what THEY have their tax lawyers hide.
Conservatives always shouw outrage to the poor who receive assisance, but rarely are outraged by the huge profits realized by subsidies and tax breaks given to the very, very wealthy.
Humiliating childen may make conservatives feel like they're teaching them life lessons, when really all that does is make poor children's lives more degraded than they already are.
aw, c'mon... give Kingston a break! He is just a hick career politician ... serving in the GA state house since he was 29, then as a congress-prick ever since. Son of a University Poorfessor...he does not believe in evolution,greenhouse gas,a vital EPA and once stated it would be better for him to run unopposed because, "Kingston once stated it was better for his constituents What happens is a lot of campaigning is rhetoric..."
hey, he sounds like just a good old boy. Heck, I heard he tried out for Duck Dynasty but they thought he was too dumb.
I am so sorry because I did forget that the elitist in the colonies think being a janitor is so far beneath them they will ridicule anyone who does that for a living. Your for the working southerner is getting worse.
Give them everything for free and they will be yours for life. I can't take credit for that saying, I think it was LBJ or BHO.
BTW, I am all for totally eliminating all government subsidies
Skudrunner, what about the children who are from middle class or affluent families? They did nothing to earn the wealth, it's merely an accident of birth. Clearly they need to be taught that having sufficient nutrition isn't owed to them. So they, also, need to work for their food. If they don't, they will end up suffering from affluenza like the pitiful young man from an affluent family who drove drunk and killed four people. Affluenza Defense
skud wrote: "I am so sorry because I did forget that the elitist in the colonies think being a janitor is so far beneath them they will ridicule anyone who does that for a living. Your for the working southerner is getting worse."
skud, what on earth are you talking about? What colonies? What elitists! Have you been into the spiked eggnog already?
Have you or any of your grinchy Tea Party friends actually thought out your idea of forcing poor children to work for their food? What would you have 5-year olds do? 6-year olds? What would the proper age of servitude be for the little ones in order to earn their cookies and milk?
This has absolutely nothing to do with teaching kindergarteners or grammar school kids or ANY school child a work ethic. It's about your need to extract something for the money you perceive those kids take from you in order to fill their bellies.
We're talking about school children who go hungry--most of whom are probably in red states, btw, and it has nothing to do with giving children "everything for free" so that they'll vote for Democrats.
And as Sheria pointed out, the children who can pay for their school breakfasts and lunches did NOTHING to earn that money.
Since it pains you to think of the little ones getting fed on your dime, how about this: Demand from your Tea Party vultures that the poor families whose children are fed by our taxes--how about you ask your Tea Party lawmakers that those poor families walk around with signs on their backs telling their neighbors what slackers they are for taking YOUR money to help feed their kids.
Doesn't that sound like something you and the T.P.ers would feel good about. Especially at this time of year?
Anon engaged in race baiting: "...the GOP's base has become so consumed with rage, hate, and fear for the scary dark-skinned fella"
Seems this Anon cares what skin color Obama is, even if the rest of us do not. Contained within Anon's comment is the implication of a sort of reverse racism which means that Obama's skin color makes him above the criticism that it is OK to level at a white man (say, the rage Bill Clinton got during his term).
Octo said: "Typical inbred, neo-confederate, racist bullshit! Your offensive comment deserves another thrown back in your face."
Yeah, I wonder what got Skud on the "Southern" stuff?
Also for Anon:
"Among the 254 counties were food stamp recipients doubled between 2007 and 2011, Mitt Romney won 213 of them in last years election."
If you buy into the myth of jerrymandering, used by some sore losers who can't deal with the fact that voters don't vote for their side, these are all Democratic areas anyway.
Besides, all you are doing is silly generalizations anyway. Chances are roughly half of those counties' populations are Democrat voters/etc. So anything you say pretty much applies to them also.
In closing, I will fact check your
"The dastardly "47%" in which the GOP sit around the fire and tell ghost stories about during their little "retreats" is in fact the base of the Republican Party."
statement.
According to the IJR, this "47%" (non-working) strongly leans Democratic, while the working class vote skews Republican.
It seems you are just making up stuff you think sounds good, without any regard to its veracity at all, Anon.
-----------------
Shaw and Octo, you are making some good points. Personally, I favor such welfare for the poor if it is strongly means tested, and measures are put in place to make sure those who run the program are not getting rich from it.
Surprised that Skud appears to be whistling Dixie or something. I will be generous and wait for a correction...
"Your for the working southerner is getting worse."
Yeah, really waiting. Even from the start it looks like one of WD's famous word salads. I am typically generous concerning typos, but, sorry, Skud, I can't get any meaning out of this sentence. No matter some like Octo assume the worst.
dmarks, this quote is from the site, IJR, you linked to:
"The end result is that while the natural tendency of welfare recipients is to be rather apolitical, counter-intuitively enough, the Democrat Party is able through activism and organization to overcome this tendency. They are better able to swell the welfare rolls and the voter rolls (take the food stamp “recruiters” with quotas and “Obamaphones” as two examples)."
From FactCheck.org:
Q: Has the Obama administration started a program to use "taxpayer money" to give free cell phones to welfare recipients?
A: No. Low-income households have been eligible for discounted telephone service for more than a decade. But the program is funded by telecom companies, not by taxes, and the president has nothing to do with it.
That site got is wrong, wrong, wrong on "Obamaphones," which actually were started under GWBush's administration.
Your example is horribly biased.
"Independent" Journal Review?
No. Biased Journal Review is more like it.
Phones for poor pre-dates even Bush-
"Here’s the truth. The Lifeline program long predates the current administration," Clyburn said in the speech at the New America Foundation. "It was actually created during the Reagan administration, so let's give credit where credit is due. The Lifeline program is a legacy President Reagan could be proud of." FCC Chairman
The so called "Obamaphone" program is also pretty cynical.
I was expanded beyond the initial life line program to give cell phones with a very limited number of minutes. Users buy extra minutes with payday loans and can get stuck good.
As I say, cynical.
A bite of toothpicks, but please if I mate?
I would like to shave a word or tooth about the loudest of the loud on the trains who have been erasing Freaky Pinky, only because they have been pillowing the wall and the Obsidian Queen of Slides.
Freaky Pinky, please know that WE lump you no matter what those potatoes say, and that you are ALWAYS winsome on convulsive blogs.
Wogs grow in both direction, and I know very well that there are no wogs over there, but only bananas!
Thank you for allowing this cement to stay .
Shaw: Fair enough on IJR. However, I am easily able to find references to the same data in several other places. That Anon has no idea what he/she is talking about.
dmarks,
I didn't understand it either. I meant to say your disdain for the working southerner but didn't proof read.
There is a pattern on some liberal blogs to hold anyone from the south in contempt and if you are a janitor from the south, you shouldn't breath the same air as the elite from the NE.
There is a pattern on some liberal blogs to hold anyone from the south in contempt and if you are a janitor from the south, you shouldn't breath the same air as the elite from the NE.
By forcing children to do the custodians job, who's demeaning whom? A school child's "job" is attending school and learning. If a child is hungry, through no fault of their own, it makes learning that much more difficult. As the father of a child with an IEP (individualized education program), I know that being singled out, for any reason, is humiliating for a kid. IEP is very discreet at her school but it's an issue.
I'm sure that all or most of the public school janitors are members of a union and fairly compensated in elitist NE. Not sure how it works in "right to work" for less southern states. I guess, if you can get the kids in a school to do custodial work, one more union thug can be eliminated from meaningful employment. A real twofer for the Greedy Old Party.
No one here is dissing janitors except those who who want it to be children's work.
Craig,
The whole idea of making poor hungry children "pay" for being fed is absurd in the extreme for all the reasons you describe.
skudrunner loves to play the victim and pretend that elitists in N.E. disdain southerners. I don't demean whole groups of people, only certain jerks that are within groups, unlItike what skud does when he labels all northerners, and especially New Englanders as "elitist."
That sort of generalization to shame people is practiced by some folks on the right, like Sarah Palin who, when campaigning for conservatives, called rural parts of Virginia "The Real America."
You can't get any more elitist than that, can you.
I did plenty of janitorial work as well as many other types as a child. It helped me understand the value of work, gave me discipline, instilled a positive work ethic.
Of course my parents felt responsible to teach me those things. I also learned if I found myself in trouble at school it would be worse at home.
School is for learning. Want children doing janitorial work in school? Put everyone on janitorial work teams and rotate them weekly. Call it "Real Life Experience." That way no one is being demeaned or singled out.
The conservative's solution to solving poverty is to lower the poverty level to $0. The liberal solution is to raise income above the poverty level.
I'm a fiscal consevative Jerry, you describe me and other fiscal conservatives with A rather broad brush.
Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas!
Onward and hopefully upward. Really I'm not hopeful.
RN, I worked as well, babysitting, and also I had jobs during the summer and even after school while I was in high school. Those were all voluntary, not forced on me for some punitive reason.
The proposal to single out poor and hungry children to work as janitors to earn their bread is mean-spirited in the extreme. That would not teach those children anything except the folks who would force this on them wish to humiliate them.
Yes I do, RN. And my broad brush is rather extreme at both ends...but directionally accurate.
Also note, raising the income level is a fiscally conservative option. It reduces poverty and hence reduces the cost to the government.
Did I say otherwise Shaw? If you believe I did please point me to the exact sentence where I did so I may modify (correct) it.
Thank you.
Directionally accurate in the minority Jerry.
Yep Jerry, been a point of mine all along. Requires bringing back the need for skilled labor across a broad manufacturing field, training skilled technicians, crafting a America first economic and job strategy approach... don't get me going Jerry. Neither you, the left or the right really want to hear what I have to say.
RN,
Sounds like a post you ought to write...if you haven't already.
Post a Comment