damn socialist government

[B_VinylBoy]

I think because I want to look at where money is being spent before adding more debt to the debt, it has turned into I am against school lunches.

I guess you forgot when you said this four days ago in this very thread:
Umm.. "fund nutrition for your kids?" If your the father of a child, I honestly think that it's your personal responsibility to care for them. Why should the government feed your children? I seriously do not relate.

So if you're not against them, why did you even say something this ignorant to begin with and use one of the most blatantly distorted, political explanations to defend it for the last three days?

My point is the same as always. We need to stop spending and get a handle on what we already spend and where money should be cut and reallocated.

That's what your argument became because after posting your statement of political brilliance (sarcasm intended), you quickly realized taking shots at additional funding for school lunch programs is stupid and tried to make it about "pork spending".

I don't read entire threads always so didn't read your family history.

The statement was made directly to you in response to a comment you made, and you actually quoted it word per word. You didn't need to read an entire thread to find it so stop making excuses. And since you ignored my personal experiences, I shall do the same with yours and not give two damns about whether or not you had to go hungry at school. That doesn't mean every other child should have to.

Also, does it really make you feel better to...put me down in every reply you make?

Yes. Because bottom line, you're trying to do the same to me whether it be directly or indirectly. You're just not that good at it.

 

[midlifebear]

Dear VB:

Long time fan, as you know. Maybe curiousme01 was concerned that all school lunch programs serve SPAM (pork shoulder and ham). It's an easy jump from there to "pork" spending. I hear that Sen. Mitch O'Connell of Kentucky has made that exact mistake. :biggrin1:

 

[Speculator]

I am quite sure there is "lost" money in just about every program. Sad, that. Somehow, we've even lost money by printing money. Now we'll lose more by spending more to fix it and reissue.

Of course, socialists have a vested interest in keeping the poor poor and the hungry hungry because they have an excuse to then get involved and redirect economic resources, consequentially this "lost" money finds itself in the pockets of them and their chums.

Without poverty or hunger they'd be no need for these huge government programmes, which is a socialist's worst nightmare.