House GOP stalls bill on lunches for needy kids

Scruffy wrote: Not sure to what schools you are referring, but at Conifer High and West Jeff Middle, children are allowed to pick and choose "a la carte" what they want so there is little waste.

Take a look at any of the urban middle and high schools where there are large numbers of children on the programs and you will see what I am talking about. Go to East HS, or Alameda HS, where most of the kids are signed up instead of a suburban school where a small minority participate.

Scruffy wrote: Here's a link to more information on the cost of the war that I pulled from who knows where:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_ ... e_Iraq_War

As of February 2010, around $704 billion has been spent based on estimates of current expenditure rates, which range from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) estimate of $2 billion per week to $12 billion a month, an estimate by economist Joseph Stiglitz.

Afghanistan and Iraq over the course of 8 years is not analogous to the current spending in Iraq on a weekly basis Scruffy. If you can't understand that, I don't know how to explain it so that the point is clear to you. You claimed that IRAQ was costing us $2 Billion a week and that is simply not true. It might have been true in 2003, or 2005, but it is not true now. Afghanistan (by far more expensive than Iraq currently) and Iraq combined in 2010 may approach that figure (which even this I doubt), but the expenditure for Iraq alone in 2010 would not even come close to that average which was garnered by taking the total estimated spending and dividing it equally over the course of time and between two theaters of operations.

And you're obviously trying to obfuscate the point of my original post, which is that we have money to fight two wars while we are trying to defund children's school meals.

PrintSmith wrote:

Scruffy wrote: Not sure to what schools you are referring, but at Conifer High and West Jeff Middle, children are allowed to pick and choose "a la carte" what they want so there is little waste.

Take a look at any of the urban middle and high schools where there are large numbers of children on the programs and you will see what I am talking about. Go to East HS, or Alameda HS, where most of the kids are signed up instead of a suburban school where a small minority participate.

Go to Jefferson County Schools and you'll see an example of the way it should be run. Should we throw out all lunch programs because they are inefficient? No. Just fix it. Jeffco is an example of how to do that.

Scruffy wrote:

PrintSmith wrote:

Scruffy wrote: Not sure to what schools you are referring, but at Conifer High and West Jeff Middle, children are allowed to pick and choose "a la carte" what they want so there is little waste.

Take a look at any of the urban middle and high schools where there are large numbers of children on the programs and you will see what I am talking about. Go to East HS, or Alameda HS, where most of the kids are signed up instead of a suburban school where a small minority participate.

Go to Jefferson County Schools and you'll see an example of the way it should be run. Should we throw out all lunch programs because they are inefficient? No. Just fix it. Jeffco is an example of how to do that.

At $ 11,000 per student, JeffCo should be giving them room and board.

Scruffy:

What say you to the claim that your Democratic party decided to defund this school lunch program so they could fund the Pigford payout????

You still want to stick with LJ's claim that it is the Republicans doing it???

Get real, would you?

Nmysys wrote: Scruffy:

What say you to the claim that your Democratic party decided to defund this school lunch program so they could fund the Pigford payout????

You still want to stick with LJ's claim that it is the Republicans doing it???

Get real, would you?

I wasn't aware of that. (I also wasn't aware that I was sticking up for LJ.) Can you provide a link?

I agree with scruffy, two wars, and american children cannot eat. She is correct, they are starving in america.

I guess they're referring to this:

Now is the Time for Justice for Black Farmers

The Court found in 1999 that Black farmers were driven from the farming profession and their property, noting that census data at the time found the number of African American farms had dropped from over 900,000 in 1920 to about 18,000. Discrimination took an enormous toll. The 1999 settlement sought to address grievances not only from black farmers, but, "All African American farmers who farmed, or attempted to farm, between January 1, 1981 and December 31, 1996". That is a period of 15 years.

Though it was not always obvious in the public eye, the White House along, with Senator Harry Reid and Republican leadership including Senator Chuck Grassley a long time friend of the farmers, was actively engaged in working through the details of the landmark legislation, the Claims Resolution Act of 2010.

The process was described by Senator Reid, who said, "The agreement that we reached shows what can happen when Democrats and Republicans come together to do the right thing."

It was best summed up by Republican Congressman and Speaker of the House-elect, John Boehner who said, "This issue has gone on for almost the 20 years that I've been here, and it needs to be resolved."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-w-bo ... 89602.html

Yeah, I guess they were supposed to suck-it-up and just ignore what happened to them--deliberately--for that 15 years... Of course, it's not a "zero-sum game"... Taking care of this long-standing obligation did NOT suddenly dry up funds for school lunch-programs... But, hey, anything to try to keep the neo-cons from looking like the "compassionate conservatives" that they are, huh?

Batifa Zaxo wrote: I agree with scruffy, two wars, and american children cannot eat. She is correct, they are starving in america.

WTF?

No...not what you said...