Republicans And Food Stamps: “Red” States Are The Major Beneficiaries, And Their Supporters Seem Unaware What Republicans Are Doing To Them!

The Republicans have declared war on “Food Stamps”, and have called Barack Obama the “Food Stamp” President!

While promoting all kinds of support for the corporate world, Republicans are out to promote massive cuts to people who are expected to feed themselves in a way no civilized person in America would want to be faced with! To hell with a balanced diet and nutrition, and therefore the promotion of bad health habits, which lead to medical problems, for which many will not have health coverage if one leaves it up to the Republicans and conservatives!

So people should starve, because they are “bad” people for being poor, and their children should do without adequate nutrition, which is impossible on the present Food Stamp benefit, before any further cuts!

But this is all veiled by the belief of conservatives that MOST of the recipients of food stamps are African American, Hispanic and Native American, and are located in “Blue” Democratic states in the major urban areas of the nation.

The facts are otherwise, as the vast majority of people on Food Stamps are white, are single females and their minor children, and live in Republican “Red” states in the South, Great Plains and Rocky Mountain areas of the nation!

So it is the “Red” states that are the real “welfare” states on Food Stamps and other benefits for the poor, and it is in these states that ignorant, uneducated, and clueless people vote Republican, without awareness of what the GOP is trying to do—make the lives of poor women and children, as well as elderly and disabled, heavily white populations ever more difficult!

This is all mind boggling, and one wonders when these poor whites will get the message as to what the party they vote for is doing to them and their children’s future!

12 comments on “Republicans And Food Stamps: “Red” States Are The Major Beneficiaries, And Their Supporters Seem Unaware What Republicans Are Doing To Them!

  1. Juan Domingo Peron June 22, 2013 7:24 pm

    Yes! Republican are so evil! LOL!
    “No matter how worthy the cause, it is robbery, theft, and injustice to confiscate the property of one person and give it to another to whom it does not belong.”
    Walter Williams
    Do you want to end poverty or at least combat it better? Well tools should be provided for those in need to lift themselves up from poverty. The #1 tool is education. Reforms to education would certainly be a good place to start. One such reform in which I believe is school choice. It’s is based on the fundamental idea of freedom and self-reliance. School choice may in fact be the Civil Rights issue of our day.
    Unfortunately, the “conservative” No Child Left Behind Act failed to include school choice because the far-left, in particular Senator Ted Kennedy, fought against it.
    The idea of school choice is simple in principle but genius in application. School choice simply refers to allowing parents to use tax vouchers in order to opt out of sending their children to public school and instead sending them to a private school of their choice. Right now, the tax system forces parents who choose to use private schools for their children, to still pay public school taxes. In my opinion, this is simply wrong. Why should one pay for a service they do not use? Why not allow one to use that same tax money to send their child to a private school?
    School choice would not only better the public schooling system by forcing it into even stiffer competition with the private school system, it would serve as a pathway to the American Dream for many impoverished Americans and as a way off of government assistance.

  2. Maggie June 22, 2013 10:21 pm

    Since Juan get to change the subject I thought I would change it again…

    Lunatics, arise! ‘Super moon’ rules this weekend.
    -By Blaine Friedlander, Published: JUNE 21, 8:55 AM ET
    It’s a weekend full of lunacy. The impending full moon, coinciding with the moon’s closest approach to Earth in its orbit, has become known as the “super moon.” In proper astronomical terms, this coupling is referred to as the perigee full moon.
    Our lunar companion travels in an elliptical orbit, which means that for every lunar cycle, it snuggles in to a position nearest Earth- its perigee, and strays to a position farthest away – its apogee.
    When the moon’s full phase coincides with perigee, the ‘super moon’ moniker is invoked.
    The full perigee or ‘super moon’ appears about 14 percent larger and 30 percent brighter than the more distant apogee full moon.
    Matter of minutes: The upcoming perigee occurs within minutes of the official full moon (but after the moon will have set for the day and not visible in that particular time window). Make some toast and pour your coffee, since on Sunday, June 23 perigee is at 7:11 a.m. eastern, when the Earth and moon will be about 356,991 kilometers, or 221,894 miles apart, according to the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada. A mere 22 minutes later – at 7:33 a.m. – the moon becomes full, according to the U.S. Naval Observatory.
    Since the coincidence of perigee and full moon falls on Sunday morning, the plump moon on Saturday and Sunday night will be each a sight to behold.
    Saturday night, June 22: The moon rises at 7:50 p.m. (yes, it is still daylight) in the southeastern sky. About 99 percent of the waxing gibbous moon’s visible disk is illuminated, according to the Naval Observatory. And at -12 magnitude, it is very bright and you can’t miss it. This moon is due south at 12:53 a.m. eastern on Sunday morning and it sets at 5:58 a.m. in the southwest. (Compare the moon’s brilliance to Venus, low in the northwestern sky at dusk is -3.9 magnitude, very bright, much like a distant airliner on approach to Washington Dulles Airport.)
    Sunday night, June 23: Moonrise occurs at 8:48 p.m. eastern in the southeast and the lunar disk remains magnificently bright at -12 magnitude.
    On either Saturday or Sunday, if you catch the moon rising as it ascends the horizon, it may look gigantic. Sure, the moon appears slightly larger than your average full moon, but you’ll still be experiencing the moon illusion.
    Astronomer Sten Odenwald offers an explanation on his Astronomy Cafe website. Earthly objects, such as trees or houses or mountains give the moon context. As the moon reaches toward the heavens, the moon appears smaller, but in reality it is the same size as minutes or hours before.
    He says our brains and eyes fall victim to illusion: “It has to do with how our brain uses information in the eye’s visual field for finding clues about the sizes of things it is seeing.”
    As mentioned earlier, the moon can be close … and far away. Our little orb reaches apogee – the most distance between the new moon and earth on July 6 at 8:36 p.m. eastern (July 7 at 12:36 a.m. UT). At 406,493 kilometers (252,583 miles) it is also the most-distant moon of the year.
    To provide ample time for party planning, the full perigee or ‘super moon’ next returns Aug. 10, 2014 – just in time to wash out some of next year’s Perseid meteors.
    Here is Maryland the moon is so bright we almost need sun glasses! LOL!
    Hope you all get a chance to see this super moon.

  3. Maggie June 22, 2013 10:25 pm

    By the way… When I used to work at the hospital.. Nights of full moon definetly brought the lunatics out… we got them in the ER!!
    Additionally labor and delivery was always packed! Babies seem to like to be born during full moons. Both of mine were!

  4. Ronald June 23, 2013 1:11 am

    Very interesting, Maggie, but irrelevant to the topic at hand! Oh well, LOL!

  5. Engineer Of Knowledge June 23, 2013 10:18 am

    Professor & Maggie,
    As a man with two daughters, I’m sick of the ignorant right wing culture wars, especially the war on women. Right wing policies are hell on economic growth and job creation, so maybe we should be grateful they haven’t done more harm.

    But this is also harm enough. They are incapable of learning or changing; that is NOT a good quality, a positive aspect. It is just one more aspect that is wrong about the right.

    One example is, “Rape isn’t rape if the woman gets pregnant.”. Their reason is based on the most egregious assumption that a woman’s body will reject a pregnancy if she was truly raped.

    This was just one example of the campaign rhetoric that the extreme reactionary right was propagating in the last election.

  6. Ronald June 23, 2013 10:47 am

    Yes, Engineer Of Knowledge, I wonder why Juan and Dave do not see the GOP attack on women as a long range problem for them, more than even Hispanic voters.

  7. Engineer Of Knowledge June 23, 2013 12:29 pm

    Yes, please disenfranchise 51% of the population. I van think of no better way to eventually purge this reactionary aspect from my Party.

  8. Juan Domingo Peron June 23, 2013 3:07 pm

    Compilation of Leftist Modern Liberal myths about the GOP/Conservatives.
    -The GOP/conservatives are obsessed with social issues. Mitt Romney barely talked about social issues during last years elections. It was the Democrats who have latched onto Todd Akin and reportedly set out to emphasize abortion at their convention. The gubernatorial race in Virginia in 2009 is typical of races these days. The Republican Bob McDonnell talked bread-and-butter economic issues issues while his opponent and the media raised social issues as a wedge to try to turn off independent voters. (McDonnell won by 17 points.)
    – The GOP doesn’t believe in community. President Obama likes to say that Republicans/conservatives want everyone to be “on his own.” In fact, conservatives believe family, communities, churches and other civil institutions are critical building blocks in society. They favor investing authority in the level of government closest to the people (locales and states), which they believe is most responsive and governs best. Republicans look upon some liberal statist schemes as both ineffective and destructive of those critical civil institutions.
    – The GOP wants to undo the New Deal. Never has it been so clear how devoted Republicans are to Social Security and to Medicare. Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget actually did not reduce spending in absolute terms; it merely slows the rate of growth.
    – Republicans/conservatives have a problem with women voters because of abortion. The famous “War on Women”. The pro-life and abortion-rights divide is not gender-based. Moreover, Republicans tend to do fairly well with married women. (In 2004 President George W. Bush won married women by 11 points.) It is among single women that Republicans struggle. The reasons are complex, including Republicans’ unwillingness to promise the demagogic “Life of Julia” cradle-to-grave support.
    – The GOP/conservatives are out to hurt the poor. Liberals tend to equate the amount the federal government spends on the poor with concern for the poor. Liberals are also suspicious of the free market. Conservatives think exactly the opposite and point to welfare reform as the greatest social program enabling people to move from the dole to self-sufficiency. When, for example, Republicans want to follow the welfare reform model (e.g. block grant Medicaid and other poverty-oriented programs) they do so in large part because they think these programs can be better managed by the states.
    – Republicans are against regulation. GOP presidents and Republican-controlled Houses and Senates over the years have not moved to do away with the SEC, FDIC, FDA, EPA or other regulatory bodies. What they object to is burdensome and/or irrational regulation. Republicans understand there is a cost associated with regulations that affects growth, employment and innovation. Moreover, Republicans/conservatives find the idea that you can eliminate all risks to be foolish.
    – The GOP’s entire agenda is about tax cuts. Obama says this quite a bit, but he’s wrong on two counts. First, Republicans/conservatives have plenty of other ideas, including domestic energy development, entitlement reform, school choice and increased trade.
    – The GOP is stuck in the past. It is an odd charge from a Democratic Party that has reverted to a tax-and-spend pre-Bill Clinton philosophy. Republicans/conservatives are the ones attacking the status quo in education, recommending innovations in Medicare and other entitlement programs and setting a goal for North American energy self-sufficiency by 2020.
    – The GOP won’t cut defense. Republicans accepted some $78 billion in cuts from Republican Defense Secretary Bob Gates. Virtually every Republican national security leader from Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) to House Armed Service Committee Chairman Howard “Buck” McKeon (R-Calif.) has expressed willingness to look for cost-saving reforms and to tackle big drivers of defense costs, including procurement. What they are not willing to do is to enact cuts that Obama’s defense secretary said would be “devastating” or cut defense to help pay for the astronomical run-up in domestic savings. They consider national security to be the first and highest obligation of the federal government.
    -Conservatives are outside the American mainstream. Conservatives can’t be mainstream because it is liberals who speak for the American people. The fact that 41 percent of Americans identify themselves as conservative and only 21 percent as liberal doesn’t matter—liberals are the guardians of the genuine interests of the American people. In the liberal imagination, the political spectrum consists of left, center, right, and far right. The most conservative senators—the Jim DeMints and Rand Pauls—are far right. But notice the absence of far left. In 2007, the most liberal of all 100 senators was Barack Obama, yet you will comb the mainstream media in vain to find a single reference to him or anyone else in American politics as far left. Liberals simply define the center as somewhere near where they are and consign vast swaths of the electorate to a place outside polite society called the far right.
    -Conservatives represent special interests. If liberals represent the American people, whom do conservatives represent? They are in bed with “special interests.” Listening to liberals, you would never guess that the titans of Wall Street regularly fill the coffers of Democratic candidates, or that the pharmaceutical industry couldn’t wait to cut a special deal on Obamacare, or that well-paid public-sector union leaders regularly extract generous salaries and benefits from their Democratic allies, or that the education unions put their own interests ahead of American youth, or that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bask in the protection of Democrats in Congress, or that many so-called leaders of minority communities actually have few real followers but rely on liberal policies and laws for the status they claim. In fact, liberalism is one nonstop orgy of special pleading and identity politics.
    -The Republican party is moving to the right. When things go wrong for liberals, as it did during the November 2010 elections, and politics seems especially divisive, it is never because liberals have moved out of the mainstream. There’s only one possible explanation: Republicans must be moving to the right. But in 1980, when Ronald Reagan was elected, Republicans stood for lower taxes, less federal spending, smaller deficits, less government regulation, a strong defense, free trade, limits on abortion, and First and Second Amendment rights. Sound familiar? This is the platform of today’s Republicans. The Democratic party, however, has careened far to the left. Who in 1980 could have imagined today’s federal budget of $3.6 trillion, 25 percent of GDP? Or today’s deficit of $1.3 trillion, up from just $161 billion in 2007? Or today’s national debt of $15 trillion? Or today’s defense spending below 4 percent of GDP? Or government control of health care and automobile companies and banks? Or marriage itself redefined? Who’s kidding whom here?
    -The Tea Party is dangerous and extreme. How then to account for the erroneous belief that Republicans have moved to the right? Why, the Tea Party! It would be hard to conjure up a more ridiculous candidate for a sinister force than this generally well-mannered and pacific political movement. Indeed, there’s a good argument that by focusing on the fiscal catastrophe staring America in the face rather than on social issues, the Tea Party has actually dampened political divisiveness. One more thing. Against baseless charges of racism, Tea Party defenders have done themselves no favor by responding, “Well, yes, there are fringe elements in all groups.” At the Tea Party rallies I have witnessed, there were not a few racists in evidence, but no racists. The relatively few minorities who spoke or attended were more than welcome; they were very much appreciated. Tea Party members wish there were more.
    -Ethnic minorities must be liberals. Why then must liberals detect nonexistent racism in the Tea Party? Because they speak for the people.They assume that, as groups which have suffered historical oppression, African Americans and other ethnic minorities simply must be liberals. Otherwise, the entire liberal narrative would be at risk. That’s why it is completely acceptable for liberals to vilify conservative blacks, whom they see as traitors to their group. Liberals feel free to attack these “Uncle Toms” personally, viciously, with the zeal of one rooting out apostasy. By the same token, liberals don’t actually have to do anything to merit the allegiance of minorities. Take a look at minority joblessness, inner city schools, and social breakdown (72 percent of African-American babies born out of wedlock): These are the fruits of many decades of liberal kindness at the federal, state, and local levels. But if more minorities succeeded, liberals would lose their reason for being.
    -Women are naturally liberals. Having suffered inequality, women too must be liberals, and conservative women must be traitors to their group. It’s quite all right to call them the ugliest names. Let’s remember: In 2010 Republicans ran some pretty rough and ready, nontraditional candidates, both men and women. Who was singled out for special derision and condescension? Sharron Angle, Christine O’Donnell, Michele Bachmann, and of course Sarah Palin, who was not even running for anything.
    -Liberals take the country forward and conservatives take it backward. Behind all these illusions lies a deeper notion: History is moving “forward,” and liberals are on the “right side of history.” But there is no intrinsic forward and backward in the historical process; there are only competing visions of America, none of which is guaranteed to succeed. If history is marching somewhere, we don’t know where. And at any given moment, the cold night of tyranny is just as possible as the clear day of enlightenment. Every step has to be won and defended on the basis of what best serves the interests of the American people. That’s why earlier generations believed that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. And, by the way, wouldn’t it be interesting to know where liberals find the metaphysical foundations on which to rest their notions of “forward” and “backward”? Liberal orthodoxy denies a God-given moral order to the universe. Its secular “progress” is nothing but the fantasy of long-dead German philosophers.
    -Liberals have moved beyond old-fashioned religion. Speaking of religion, those who cling to it are going backwards. They do not operate in what Barack Obama has called the world of “facts and science and argument.” Liberals have resolved once and for all—in their own minds—the irresolvable claims of reason and revelation, and reason has won. Nevertheless, in the real world, religion remains vital. That erstwhile paragon of the hard left, the former Soviet Union, failed to stamp out Christianity. The church is growing vigorously in China, despite Beijing’s every effort to repress and control it. The progressive liberal democracies of Europe are once again confronting the force of religious claims, this time of Islam. Liberals have not transcended religion; they are simply tone deaf to it. That’s why they fundamentally misunderstand Islam, closing their eyes to its teaching and practice in areas like marriage and women’s rights and freedom of conscience. This will not have good consequences.
    -Good intentions are enough for liberals. But accurately judging consequences is less important to liberals than moving forward. Liberal programs do not represent testable social-policy experiments to be judged by their results. They represent compassion, so their critics are heartless. Money spent on these programs cannot be wasted because they are investments in people. Liberals are to be judged by the purity of their intentions.
    -No logical arguments need be made against conservatives. For liberals there are never two legitimate sides in a debate. There are only forward and backward, good intentions and bad intentions. It is not necessary to argue the merits of an issue with someone who is pointing backward; it is enough to locate that person as pointing backward. To do so is to make the case and prove the case. The result is predictable: The essence of liberal argument is ad hominem attack. Liberals do not confront arguments directly, any more than they confront religious claims directly; they go behind conservative arguments to vilify the messenger. If you disagree with liberal policy you are a xenophobe, a homophobe, an Islamophobe, a racist, an extremist, or lately a “terrorist.” ( This is typical of Ron) As the president has said, you are too scared to think straight. Instead of answering your arguments, liberals aim to shut you up with snarky TV entertainment shows.
    A hundred years ago, the philosopher George Santayana cut to the core of this mentality. In his commentary on Goethe’s Faust, Santayana wrote of the modern liberal that “his ultimate satisfaction in his work is not founded on any good done, but on a passionate willfulness. He calls the thing he wants for others good, because he wants to bestow it on them, not because they naturally want it for themselves. Incapable of sympathy, he has a momentary pleasure in policy.” Just perfect.What this willful liberal does not admit is that decent, intelligent people who understand their own interests and understand liberal policies can still reject them.

  9. Ronald June 23, 2013 3:46 pm

    Juan, where did you copy this from–the American Enterprise Institute, the Federalist Society, or the Heritage Foundation?

    And I have not used Xenophobe or terrorist as terms, and rarely used Islamophobe, but racist, and homophobe, and extremist are appropriate, and I only use them when appropriate, while you are constantly on the attack with your propaganda!

  10. Juan Domingo Peron June 23, 2013 4:00 pm

    Ron: It’s common knowledge and common sense. Also I was not talking of you specifically but of libs in general. But I must admit your “doublespeak” is sometime stunning. So if I reply to your attacks on the GOP/conservatives and defend them, I am the one doing the attacking with propaganda? Do you ever read what you post? Like we say in Spanish “El muerto se asusta del degollado”, “The dead guy’s scared of the decapitated guy.” Seriously!
    Finally I was just replying to your inquiry; “I wonder why Juan and Dave do not see the GOP attack on women as a long range problem for them, more than even Hispanic voters?” Answer in case you didn’t get it; because your question is based on typical liberal myths!

  11. Ronald June 23, 2013 5:00 pm

    You call them myths, I call it reality and the truth!

  12. Juan Domingo Peron June 23, 2013 5:36 pm

    Of course because you equate the amount the federal government spends on the poor with concern for the poor. LOL!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.