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?
No comments:
Post a Comment