Behind the Headlines
Video of the Week
Internet Articles (2011)
Internet Articles (2010)
Internet Articles (2008)
Internet Articles (2007)
Internet Articles (2006)
Internet Articles (2005)
Internet Articles (2004)
Internet Articles (2003)
Internet Articles (2002)
Internet Articles (2001)
Remember Tupperware parties? Or
Sarah Coventry jewelry parties? Or
Amway? Now try a Food Stamp party
from the USDA's SNAP Program.
And you wondered
why 47.76 million American families joined the "Gimme Stuff"
crowd by allowing themselves to get addicted to food stamps? Because
the USDA made it easy. They made it "okay." And, they
made it fun. But what Uncle Sam can't do is make selling your
pride for a stipend from the State palatable. If your family ethics
is centered on working what you have, then the gratuities of the
State that shackle you to Big Brother's feeding trough is more
than a discomforting embarrassment. It makes you feel like an
indentured servant of the State. But
that's only because you become just that. On election day you
discover the chain that shackles you to the feeding trough also
chains you to the bureaucracy's voting booth as well and, too
late, you discover the price you pay for the gratuities of the
government is control over how you vote. The "free stuff"
has a price tag. The price tag is liberty.
That's why the Obama
Administration has engaged in food stamp trickery. It's critical
to the agenda of the left. In a press release issued on Sept.
4, 2012, Obama Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack,
the former Democratic governor of Iowa, said there are "...too
many middle-class families who have fallen on hard times are still
struggling. Our goal is to get these families the temporary assistance
they need so they are able to get through these tough times and
back on their feet as soon as possible."
And, that's why the
US House of Representatives, in a 217-200 vote approved a bill
containing $40 billion food stamp spending cuts on Sept. 19, 2012.
As the measure was coming up for a vote, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor [R-VA], who was the driving force behind the
bill, told the members that it was "...wrong for working
middle-class families to pay for the abuses in the program..." whose costs have skyrocketed in recent years as the left works
hard to shackle even more Americans to the government feeding
trough in an attempt to control their vote. Prior to the House
vote, the Senate already passed a similar measure in Mayonly
their proposed token cuts were around $4.5 billion (so they could
claim, to the middle class voters back home) that they voted to
cut welfare spending, and at the same time, campaign that they
fought to rein in heartless Republican by minimizing the loss
of benefit to those still signing up at Food Stamp parties all
around the country.
Since 2009 the USDA
has devoted considerable time dreaming up entire public relations
promotional campaigns to entice potentially eligible Americans
to participate in SNAP. Obama feels that the more people
there are in the program, the less stigma there will be attached
to it. You can't look down on your neighbor's using food stamps
if you're using them, too.
Posted on the USDA
website in September, 2012 was a phamplet (available at local
SNAP offices) that encouraged SNAP officials to throw "food
stamp parties" as a way to encourage seniors on fixed incomes
to enroll in the program. The
phamplet read: "Throw a Great Party. Host social
events where people mix and mingle. Make it fun by having activities,
games, food and entertainment, and provide information about SNAP.
Putting SNAP information in a game format like BINGO, crossword
puzzles, or even in a 'true/false' quiz is fun and helps get your
message across in a memorable way."
The Daily Caller reported
in June, 2012 that the USDA began running radio ads in March and
continued them through June at a cost to taxpayers of between
$2.5 to $3 million. CNN reported that the first time the USDA
used that ploy (attempting to attract seniors into applying for
food stamps) was in 2004 under President George W. Bushwho
oversaw (CNN said, quoting the Obama Administration) a
63% increase in food stamp participation.
However, on Jan.
1, 2005, the highest food stamp usage in any State was 20.5%.
While the Bush-43 increase may have been 63% over what
the previous levels were, CNN stats implied that where 47% of
the eligible population are currently on food stamps today, 63%
of the eligible SNAP recipients were on food stamps under Bush-43which
appears to be something of a deliberate gross exaggeration.
If the amount of
people on food stamps in 2004 before Bush-43 initiated
what CNN implied was his "invitation
to welfare" program (if he actually did) was, say, 10% of
those potentially eligible, then a 63% increase would raise the
number of participants to 16.3% If only 5% of the population was
on food stamps, a 63% increase would raise the total percentage
of food stamp recipients to about 13.2% CNN's
social progressive vegans apparently can't tell the difference
between apples and tomatoes, believing since both are red and
both are technically fruit, they must both be apples.
After the House vote
to cut $40 billion in food stamp spending, House and Senate Democrats
got on the stump, arguing that the GOP bill was going to eliminate
benefits to about 4 million of the neediest families in America.
Senator Debbie Stabenow [D-MI], chairwoman of the Senate
Agriculture Committee said "...we have never before seen
this kind of partisanship injected into a farm bill," adding
the House bill was "...a monumental waste of time that
will never become law." The White House, which wants
even more people on welfare (and its job creation efforts support
that theory) threatened, on Wednesday, Sept. 18, to veto to House
measure to "...prevent damage to one of our nation's strongest
defenses against hunger and poverty."
now receive food stamp assistance. Many of those on welfare hold
solid middle income jobs, The recipients are, in many cases, people
who own their own homes, have least two family vehiclesand
vacation somewhere other than in their back yard each year. Because
recipients today receive debit cards that look like credit cards,
they don't carry the "food stamp" stigma that many many
needy Americans shun the program in the past out of the shame
associated with paying for your groceries with USDA food coupons.
Today, food stamps have become "free money." And the
prevailing mood is that no one in their right mind turns down
free money. Only, it's not free. It's paid for by your neighbors
who ae struggling to make ends meet just like you. Well, forwhatever it's
worth, once again, you have my two cents worth on this subject. Until