Posted on 02/22/2012 12:57:41 PM PST by SeekAndFind
I don’t know the specifics of why he opposed that particular cut.
But the better solution is to get people good jobs, so that they are off of all of these services, not just food stamps.
I have absolutely nothing against feeding the hungry at my expense. But I do have problem when I see people at the cash register paying with food stamps and have i-phones. Something is out of whack. Since when expensive cell phones became a necessity?
Another problem that I have with food stamps/feeding the “poor” is this: over the past several years, the schools (with federal tax money) have gone from giving reduced-cost lunches to the “poor” to now giving free breakfasts, lunches, and sometimes dinners to the “poor”, and sending food home with them on weekends. Plus having programs the whole family can attend in the summer for free meals. But nothing has been done to reduce the amount of food stamps that these same people get. So the taxpayers are feeding these people sometimes two and three times per meal. No wonder obesity is such a problem. And so many of them have those fancy custom manicures....
...Not sure if serious.....
He voted for increased funding for food stamps and then BRAGGED ABOUT IT IN HIS 2006 RE ELECTION CAMPAIGN.
He is the food stamp senator.
“he was not in favor of Tarp or healthcare mandates.”
Fiddlesticks.
He left the Senate in 2006, so he had no say or vote in either.
I generally agree.
However it’s not always what it looks like. There are a lot of people who fell on hard times who already had expensive i-phones.
I think that was part of the idea of them removing the asset criteria and leaving only the income criteria. A family with a very nice home, loses their jobs, and quickly gets overextended and needs help just to put food on the table. They didn’t want people having to sell the family home in the middle of a financial crisis.
However, I think if they have non-assets above x, help should be structured as a loan, not a hand out. And if they have liquid assets above y, they shouldn’t be getting food stamps regardless of current income.
Exactly. I don’t agree with this decision he made, but I’d like to hear him out on it. There is no candidate I would agree with 100% of the time. Isn’t that what mayor Koch once said, that is so true? If you agree with your candidate 80%, great. 100%, have your head examined.
What are your alternatives? Gingrich has special pity for even poor aliens as long as their are able to push two generations from their loins — something no one has much trouble doing. On soil where they do not belong.
Or you want Paul or Romney?
And when was Newt last in office? He managed to hold the opposite opinions without a vote.
Trashing Santorum in the hopes that the man running 4th in a three man race will benefit is silly. Newt will either do well in the debate tonight and move appropriately in the polls or he will drop like a rock. I personal think he will hit a home run tonight, because he has to, but what if he doesn't?
Dude,
Quit your incessant childish whining about our final two conservatives in the race.. Most everyone here is on to your mudslinging and pathetic attempts to split conservatives. Let me guess? Hmmmm.... YOU were a Rombot in 2008.
The seven new polls released today:
Michigan @NBC News/Marist
Santorum 35, Romney 37, Gingrich 8
NEWTORUM +6 OVER Willard
Oklahoma @Rasmussen Reports
Santorum 43, Romney 18, Gingrich 22
NEWTORUM +47 OVER Willard
Wisconsin @Marquette Survey
Santorum 34, Romney 18, Gingrich 12
NEWTORUM +28 OVER Willard
California @Field Polling
Romney 31, Santorum 25, Gingrich 12
NEWTORUM +6 OVER Willard
2012 Republican Presidential Nomination @Associated Press/GfK
Santorum 33, Romney 32, Gingrich 15
NEWTORUM +16 OVER Willard
2012 Republican Presidential Nomination @Quinnipiac Survey
Santorum 35, Romney 26, Gingrich 14
NEWTORUM +23 OVER Willard
2012 Republican Presidential Nomination @Gallup Tracking
Santorum 35, Romney 27, Gingrich 15
NEWTORUM +23 OVER Willard
I wonder if this will come up in tonight’s debate.
Just goes to show, I think, that none of the Republicans running for President are perfect.
All of them are better than the clown currently occupying the Oval Office.
Dude,
Change your name.
Cain can’t stand your boi.
Santroum was already voted out of office by the time both issues went up for vote, so giving him credit for being against it, particularly after Santorum had a chance to test the water among the electorate and then take a side, is a far cry form how he would have voted when he was an active Senator.
There is plenty of evidence to go on, in regards to Santorum’s full career that proves he is not the conservative that he, or his supporters say he is.
Maybe you should read this:
http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2012/02/13/an-open-challenge-to-supporters-of-rick-santorum/
AND THEN WATCH THIS!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJblJfgXBgw&feature=youtu.be
I do not agree. These people who own nice homes and have nice cars and have enjoyed vacations and nice clothes, they should have had the foresight to NOT spend every dollar of income. I have watched my spending, for exactly the reason to avoid needing food stamps within a few weeks of losing a job. I do not feel sorry for these people who live for today because we will take care of their tomorrow. Let them learn responsibility and self reliance.
Theoretically I could probably be eligible for food stamps because my cash is earning almost zero income and I am retired. But I will not burden other tax payers so long as I have enough cash assets to buy my own food.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.