President Trump has proposed replacing some food stamp grants with…actual food. This proposal to give the needy real food has, naturally, enraged liberals. Why take away the middle-man they ask? It’s heartless to take choices away from the hungry, they scream!
It’s always amusing when leftist lowlifes try to rise to a high dudgeon.
And it’s more than a little ironic that the only time liberals want limited government and a free market, free choice society is when they’re trying to protect massive governmental entitlement programs or the inalienable right to kill one’s baby. The fundamental principle at work here is summed up by the old phrase “beggars can’t be choosers.” If a person has a job- or jobs- and is not on the dole, they have earned the right to choose. However, if one is unemployed and wishes to purchase lobster, steak, Twinkies, and a few six-packs of Budweiser with other people’s money, it is more than moral to at least partially control their spending choices. Progressives actually try to reverse this common-sense guideline.
The administration’s proposal would modify the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, formerly known as “food stamps,” affecting roughly 80% of current recipients. These recipients would get approximately half of their benefits in the form of a “USDA Foods package,” consisting of items such as “shelf-stable milk, ready-to-eat cereals, pasta, peanut butter, beans, and canned fruit and vegetables.”
Hilariously, left-wing critics of the plan warn that it will increase bureaucracy and foster a more intrusive government, apparently hoping everyone will forget that is precisely what all of their policy prescriptions have been designed to do since FDR was in office. Others worry that the proposal, if put in place, would somehow “stigmatize” recipients. (This has certainly not been a problem in recent decades, for those on food stamps, and wouldn’t be a bad thing if it were true. A little motivation can be a good thing). Stigmatize? “Harry, is that pasta and green beans you’ve got there? Where are the steak and Twinkies? And, is that…milk…your drinking? Dude, I stopped by to share a Bud and a smoke!”
The Vice-President for Food Assistance Policy (VPFAP) at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), Stacy Dean (MICKEYMOUSE), termed the proposal “radical and risky.” Really? Gay marriage, transgender bathrooms, giving Iran and North Korea nuclear weapons capability…these policies they were solidly behind, but giving poor people food in place of cash is radical and risky? Their favorite First Lady in American history, Michelle Obama, acted as a one-person food Gestapo for the entire American public-school system, to their adoring approval. Unbelievable.
The rotten “soul,”- or what passes for it- of the left is exposed for all to see. Progressives are in a permanent snit regarding all things Trumpian, even as they fawn over the delegation from North Korea at the Winter Olympic Games. Trump Derangement Syndrome is so advanced, one wonders: if Trump came out as gay, would previously Pride!ful gay liberals go running back into the closet, seek conversion therapy and denounce the LGBTQ community as a basket of deplorables promoting fascism and intolerance?
Post a Comment