GOP Slash Food Aid For Low-Income Women And Children

PrintSmith wrote: Democrat Senate refusal to cut $5Billion in ethanol subsidies is. You gotta love regressive logic - it's really quite entertaining.

Some Republicans voted against it too......and Romney is in favor of keeping the subsidies......the poor republicans can't decide if removing the subsidies equates to raising taxes, so they just didn't know how to handle the dilemma.So you are right, it is quite entertaining.

LadyJazzer wrote: You gotta love that people making $750,000/year are still able to feed at the public tit and get government handouts while WIC programs that help women and children with nutrition get cut...

That's entertaining too, in a Party-of-Selfish, "let them eat cake" sort of way...

:thumbsup: Little known fact, after 2 years of Obamanation, more families are on WIC and food stamps than ever before. Just because the number of people entering the food stamp program isn't as many as it was last year when Pelosi and Reid were screwing over the economy, the Dems call it a cutback.

SS109 wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: You gotta love that people making $750,000/year are still able to feed at the public tit and get government handouts while WIC programs that help women and children with nutrition get cut...

That's entertaining too, in a Party-of-Selfish, "let them eat cake" sort of way...

:thumbsup: Little known fact, after 2 years of Obamanation, more families are on WIC and food stamps than ever before. Just because the number of people entering the food stamp program isn't as many as it was last year when Pelosi and Reid were screwing over the economy, the Dems call it a cutback.

I'm sure it's because Obama is president, not because of the recession....oh yeah, that is all Obama's fault......he somehow managed to start it when Bush was president.....I keep forgetting that little known conservative fact. When you cut a percentage of funding, you are reducing the amount available to people that money is intended to serve(duh)....that too is a little known fact.

archer wrote:

SS109 wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: You gotta love that people making $750,000/year are still able to feed at the public tit and get government handouts while WIC programs that help women and children with nutrition get cut...

That's entertaining too, in a Party-of-Selfish, "let them eat cake" sort of way...

:thumbsup: Little known fact, after 2 years of Obamanation, more families are on WIC and food stamps than ever before. Just because the number of people entering the food stamp program isn't as many as it was last year when Pelosi and Reid were screwing over the economy, the Dems call it a cutback.

I'm sure it's because Obama is president, not because of the recession....oh yeah, that is all Obama's fault......he somehow managed to start it when Bush was president.....I keep forgetting that little known conservative fact. When you cut a percentage of funding, you are reducing the amount available to people that money is intended to serve(duh)....that too is a little known fact.

In 2006, Congress and the Senate came into Democratic hands, about when the recession & Obama started in the Senate. What is their responsibility? And when is Barack going to claim this current economic disaster? After 2 years? After 4 years? After 8 years? Or will "W" be the super President who serves for eight years but is responsible for 16 years. Should Bush II have just been allowed to continue running things since his tax cuts & foreign policy are still in effect?

SS109 wrote: In 2006, Congress and the Senate came into Democratic hands, about when the recession & Obama started in the Senate. What is their responsibility? And when is Barack going to claim this current economic disaster? After 2 years? After 4 years? After 8 years? Or will "W" be the super President who serves for eight years but is responsible for 16 years. Should Bush II have just been allowed to continue running things since his tax cuts & foreign policy are still in effect?

should convoluted logic be outlawed on message boards? you betcha.

When Bush was president, everything got blamed on the congress....now we don't blame congress, we blame Obama, and when the Republicans took the house, we blame the senate. Has anyone ever seen the conservatives take responsibility for any of this recession?

archer votes for being banned from posting! :thumbsup:

archer wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: Democrat Senate refusal to cut $5Billion in ethanol subsidies is. You gotta love regressive logic - it's really quite entertaining.

Some Republicans voted against it too......and Romney is in favor of keeping the subsidies......the poor republicans can't decide if removing the subsidies equates to raising taxes, so they just didn't know how to handle the dilemma. So you are right, it is quite entertaining.

And despite the reality that it is a bipartisan effort in both houses of Congress, the demagoguery is limited to one party, and one party alone. Why is that archer? Why is it that the GOP is responsible for a cut to a program that is 400% larger than the program in the House and the Democrats in control of the Senate bear no responsibility when what is being protected by the arm of Congress they control is nearly 24x the amount represented by the action in the GOP House? Why isn't the Senate called the Democratic Senate when the author of the opinion defines it as the GOP House?

That's an easy answer, isn't it. Lies and distortions to further the demagogic agenda of the site in question. Quite transparent really and something no person with any ability to reason would accept as anything other than lies and distortions.

hey archer, maybe we can have harry reid, read to those in the breadline some cowboy poetry, while they starve to death!
[youtube:1pzjd88r][/youtube:1pzjd88r]

SS109 wrote:

archer wrote:

SS109 wrote:

LadyJazzer wrote: You gotta love that people making $750,000/year are still able to feed at the public tit and get government handouts while WIC programs that help women and children with nutrition get cut...

That's entertaining too, in a Party-of-Selfish, "let them eat cake" sort of way...

:thumbsup: Little known fact, after 2 years of Obamanation, more families are on WIC and food stamps than ever before. Just because the number of people entering the food stamp program isn't as many as it was last year when Pelosi and Reid were screwing over the economy, the Dems call it a cutback.

I'm sure it's because Obama is president, not because of the recession....oh yeah, that is all Obama's fault......he somehow managed to start it when Bush was president.....I keep forgetting that little known conservative fact. When you cut a percentage of funding, you are reducing the amount available to people that money is intended to serve(duh)....that too is a little known fact.

In 2006, Congress and the Senate came into Democratic hands, about when the recession & Obama started in the Senate. What is their responsibility? And when is Barack going to claim this current economic disaster? After 2 years? After 4 years? After 8 years? Or will "W" be the super President who serves for eight years but is responsible for 16 years. Should Bush II have just been allowed to continue running things since his tax cuts & foreign policy are still in effect?

If the Congress presented GWB with legislation that he (and all of his fellow Republicans-like you, for instance) knew would tank the economy, why didn't he veto it? You think that lowering taxes, off-budget wars, and GWB's awesome "ownership society" programs, etc. had nothing to do with it, though? Neat thought (sic) processes you got going on there.

How long do libs keep blaming bush? This is obama's watch now..or did libs forget that?