The occupant of today’s ducking stool is a post by Erick Erickson that is entitled — I shit you not — “The Perversion of the Words of Our Lord Jesus Christ by the Sinner Barack H. Obama.” CottonMather CottonMatherson waxes theological for 1,500 words or so, returning to variations on the word “pervert” with such alarming frequency as to inspire concern for Georgia’s dairy goat population.
The post is such a textbook demonstration of moral obtuseness, ignorance and conceit that to put it through the Ensnarkerator seems superfluous. Instead, I’ll turn the analysis of Preacher SonOfAPreacherman over to Emily J. Brontë, who described a similar (but harder-working) character thusly:
He was, and is yet most likely, the wearisomest self-righteous Pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself and fling the curses to his neighbours.
Speaking of assholes, we’ve got our own low-rent version of Sarah Palin in the Florida legislature: State Senator Ronda Storms. She just introduced a bill to ban welfare recipients from using food stamps to purchase cakes, cookies, Jello and potato chips. Is it because she’s concerned about good nutrition? Hell no. Storms wants to make sure a struggling single mom can’t buy her child an Oreo because Storms is a self-righteous, sanctimonious jackass.
And naturally, Storms is another tiresome god-botherer who would make Jesus, if he existed, puke his holy guts out. Her continued existence, unsmited, is all the evidence I need that Bill Maher has it right in the clip down yonder.
[X-POSTED at Rumproast]
GregB
Republicans hate regulating business but they live regulating humans.
Violet
I realize this comment is a bit OT, but since you mentioned Erik, it reminded me of his panting after Perry. I saw this Nooners column today and thought it was pretty telling:
The Republican establishment made their bed by courting people like the idiot you mention above and now the crazies have taken over. They are not going to get a savior. And whoever this guy is that Noonan quotes is still crazy if he thinks the Bush name is going to be popular in four years time.
Mary Jane
Stoled.
harlana
you forgot sociopathy
Davis X. Machina
Now, now, Betty, those sluts don’t shame themselves. And what with the collapse of international Communism, and Al Qaeda having yard sales, what else can you run on?
God, gays and guns. For forty years, it’s been God, gays and guns.
They’ve lost on #2, won on #3— the courts have effectively put #3 out of reach—and even they can do process of elimination.
Mike in NC
A number of state legislatures are looking at Republican efforts to deny unemployment benefits to people by applying various restrictions, to include mandatory drug testing as a precondition to eligibility.
Jobs, jobs, jobs!
Montysano
Never get out of the boat. Absolutely goddamn right. The mangoes were moldy and rotten.
someguy
The real outrage here isn’t Eric son of Eric waxing all pharisitical on us. It’s that leaders of our country are taking orders from invisible men. *That* is what worries me.
And Obama can quote the gospel and all, that’s some good lovey dovey pile of bullshit there, but that lovey dovey crap is only a few hundred pages away from where the Big Invisible Dude directs the believers to smite the Persians, but if Obama ever loses his bookmark and opens to the wrong page we’re all fucked.
harlana
Storms wants to make sure a struggling single mom can’t buy her child an Oreo because Storms is a self-righteous, sanctimonious jackass.
harlana
i hate the block quote function
((sigh))
harlana
@Mike in NC: it never ends; may the time come, in my lifetime, that i see the very same people who want to institute this type of legislation standing in that unemployment line, but like Barney Frank, i don’t think i’ve lived a good enough life for that.
DanielX
Ooooh, an Erick son of Erick epistle. I can hear the sound of the Red State Strike Force assembling already (fapfapfap).
Davis X. Machina
@someguy: It’s hard to see, in the contest of American electoral politics, using Die Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten to make basically the point.
And if you lose the bookmark on that, you have to invade Poland.
harlana
completely OT, but for informational purposes: the warmest spot to smooch on a cat’s head is the temple area, the area between the eye and ear. i highly recommend it.
priscianusjr
Zandar
Bwahahahahaha.
Amir Khalid
@harlana:
THIS.
suzanne
Epic win.
@someguy: Oh please. The man was the editor of the Harvard Law Review. Methinks he can ascertain the difference between reality and metaphor.
Davis X. Machina
@priscianusjr: Try it and the potato-industrial complex, led by my wonderful Sen. Susan Collins, will have your guts for garters.
schrodinger's cat
@harlana: I like to kiss my kitteh on his pink nose. He hates it, though.
RSA
Religion is a funny thing. On what other topic do extraordinarily stupid people feel confident enough to hold themselves up as experts? Maybe sports and politics. (And now I see a theme–it’s us versus them.)
MattF
I’m not gonna click on that link. Not not not.
That said, I’d also caution that the Ensnarkerator can be pushed into an unstable regime, so have a care. We’re going to need it in working order.
Lori
What you say totally makes sense to me, except for the food stamps for healthy food part. As someone who thinks the social safety net is important and needs to be expanded, I disagree with you about junk food. I think social policy supporting healthy food makes sense, and that tax dollars should be used for healthy foods. We all know that candy and soda aren’t healthy foods. As someone who worked two jobs as a grocery checkout clerk (part-time jobs while in undergrad), I was surprised to see some of the people using food stamps were heavily overweight and purchasing extremely unhealthy food. By limiting food stamp options to eliminate the most eggregiously unhealthy ones, I think our food programs could not only eliminate hunger but simultaneously increase the health of our poorest citizens. The pee testing for drugs doesn’t make sense, but the limiting of food stamp dollars for healthy foods definitely does.
Davis X. Machina
@Lori: The number one cause of poverty in America is not having enough money. You fix it by giving people money.
Any poverty debate that isn’t about why people don’t have enough money isn’t actually a debate about poverty.
It’s about something else. That doesn’t mean it’s not worth having, it means it’s not about poverty.
JGabriel
Betty Cracker @ Top:
There’s a saying, from Jesus I think, about concerning one’s self with the plank in one’s own eye before bitching about the mote in others.
Makes me wonder what the hell plank of perversions Erickson must be up to, or imagine himself up to, to imagine and bitch about such a mote so frequently and vehemently in everyone else.
.
Mino
Doesn’t get more acute than Jane.
Doesn’t it just make you tired that the same characters show up, eon after eon.
Mino
@Lori: You make me tired. And I am a health food nerd.
gogol's wife
@Mary Jane:
I believe that’s a quote from Max von Sydow in “Hannah and Her Sisters.” At any rate, he said it first! Funniest line in the movie.
gogol's wife
FYWP, won’t let me edit my comment #28 to clarify, Max said, “If Jesus came to earth today, he’d never stop puking his guts out.” (Or something like that, I don’t have time to google, anyway the word “holy” wasn’t in Woody Allen’s version.)
gogol's wife
Is that really Cotton Mather? It looks like JS Bach.
Angela
Betty Cracker I enjoy your writing so much that I clicked on the link. I will never do that again.
JGabriel
@MattF:
If the Ensnarkerator can’t handle an intellectual bantamweight like Erick Erickson, it’ll never survive the general election.
Better to push it now, so we can fix it in time for autumn if it breaks.
.
Elizabelle
@Mino:
I agree with Lori.
Nothing to stop those receiving benefits from purchasing junk food. With cash.
But food stamps could and should be used for healthful food.
Elizabelle the tiresome
Elizabelle
With apologies to Emily J. Bronte:
Miss Bronte knew her Pharisees. Sadly, the type yet walks among us today.
Linda Featheringill
I saw Erik’s epistle at RedState. I did a very superficial scan and it seemed to be about contraception.
And no, thank you, I’m not going to fight any contraception battles. I’m not going to fight over who is doing whom.
I am a little miffed because Erik seems to think that he has been endowed with the gift of separating saints from sinners. Really? Just who the hell does he think he is?
Seriously. Who made him the judge of the world?
And when he prays, is he worshiping a divine being? Or is he worshiping himself?
Cassidy
@Lori: So what’s the determination of healthy? Fresh veggies are healthier than canned, but more expensive. Do I have to use my limited assistance funds to buy the most expensive item? Are they only allowed to buy the frozen meat, that’s a few days old? Are you gonna ban families who are working multiple jobs, from buying easy meals like hamburger helper? That’s not healthy, but I’m sure every single mom out there appreciates the ability to make dinner quickly.
Of course that’s where any argument breaks down. Who gets to be the arbiter of “health food”. As mentioned, these “ideas” are never about teaching anyone healthy habits; their about enforcing morality. It’s about making sure the poor people know they are poor.
You shouldn’t be allowed to eat what my family eats because you are poor.
That is the underlying message of any of these legislation moves. As one of those people who is on public assistance, I soundly reject your attempt to legislate what I feed my family. You do not have the right.
SiubhanDuinne
@harlana:
Yeah, like we didn’t all already know that.
Elizabelle
Fixt.
Yevgraf
In the pantheon of stupid that is the roll of Townhall bloggers, Doug Giles is Zeus.
http://townhall.com/columnists/douggiles/2012/02/05/who_would_jesus_tax
Mr Stagger Lee
If this Judgement Day Mythology was a reality. I would love to see these A-holes go before the Big Guy with the beard, and try to explain themselves. I hope afterlife has a good popcorn. );-)
opie jeanne
@gogol’s wife: I was going to say that. Wonder why he looks so pissed.
Mary Jane
@gogol’s wife: Great line. I assume it’s from Woody Allen. I saw Midnight in Paris last night and loved it. But I digress- adding god-botherer makes the quote even better.
edit- totally missed your mention of W.A. at first read.
Elizabelle
@Cassidy:
No one is saying you need buy the most expensive item.
But you can draw a line, a bright line actually, between Cheetoes and salad.
Hamburger Helper is different from Oreos or beer or cigarettes.
I am glad that food assistance and other benefits are there for you. Also am sure that you strive mightily to feed your family healthily, and that everyone enjoys some ice cream or snack foods on occasion.
No pretending they’re healthy food, though, or anything but splurges.
Lot of gray areas here.
Nicole
@Elizabelle: While we’re at it, why don’t we ban the poor from using mass transit, because you know, they need the exercise.
I understand where the sentiment of wanting people to be healthier comes from, but by dictating what kind of food they can purchase, you’re still punishing them for being poor. Let’s worry about education and job opportunities before we start worrying about whether the poor are eating too many Oreos for our middle-class comfort.
I really don’t mean to sound like an angry asshole, but the “healthy foods” for the poor, I think, also comes out of a bias we have against overweight people, many of whom are also poor. I was guilty of fat bias for years, and I feel terrible about it now. Because blaming people for being fat comes out of the same place that blaming people for being poor does.
Cassidy
@Elizabelle: Once again, what gives you the right? I’m not going to detail what I buy when I go grocery shopping; it’s not any of your all’s business. I’d happily discuss it in a different thread regarding being thrifty and good deals, but in the context of this conversation, it’s not your business.
So, once again: what gives you the right to judge what people like me buy? Why am I not allowed to buy my children Oreo’s to have as a snack? What’s next, should poor people go around wearing clothes only bought from Goodwill or Salvation Army? How old does my car have to be to meet your morality standard of how poor I should look?
And thank your for being sure that I feed my family healthy meals. Why shouldn’t the majority of people on assistance get that same benefit of the doubt?
Elizabelle
@Nicole:
I think that’s a specious argument too.
Not standing up for Ronda Storms, and don’t know anything about her proposed legislation. Also aware that Rick Scott’s (and others’) proposals to drug test all who receive welfare benefits is whacked.
But I wouldn’t mind seeing food stamps go to buy actual, healthful food.
It’s better for those who eat it.
It would be way cool to organize farmer’s markets in “food deserts” where beneficiaries could spend for good, locally grown food at a discounted price. Helps the farmers, helps the diners.
Mino
There are federal guide lines established through the WIC program. Anyone wishing to choose healthy options can use that list. Educate, don’t dictate. We don’t know anyone’s particular circumstances.
TBogg
I just saw a picture of Storms. From the looks of it here bill is more of a “More Junk Food For Me” bill. Impressive set o’ chins she’s got there.
Vaughan Thomas
That Erikson post, and the comments afterwards, scared this Christian to the bone. Ericsson does exactly what he accuses Obama of: misinterpreting Jese and Biblical cal writings. But then they take it further and state they owe the country nothing due to these I terpfetations. They compare Obama to the anti-Christ. This doesn’t end well if taken to its conclusion.
Elizabelle
This thread is giving me a fresh appreciation for the minefields Michele Obama has been wise enough to avoid.
Linda Featheringill
Healthy food for poor people.
The WIC benefits can be used to buy only specific foods. Maybe the question is whether that should be expanded to regular food stamps.
Mino
@TBogg: She’s afraid the store will run out?
Cacti
@Elizabelle:
Thanks for reminding us that vegetables are healthier than cookies, Mommy.
But which federal, state, or local agency gets to decide the definition of “healthy”?
gocart mozart
Perhaps Erick son of Erick is not aware that his idol Ayn Rand hated the baby jesus with a passion equaled only by her contempt for the poor.
Watch this revealing interview of Ayn Rand by Mike Wallace.
http://aynrandhatedjesus.blogspot.com/
The Ancient Randonneur
hhhhhhhhhhmmm … Has anyone ever seen Erick son of Erick in the same room with Mickey Kaus? Just asking …
Felinious Wench
Gee, I have this crazy idea. How about we GIVE fruits and vegetables to the poor at little to no charge? Make it cheaper than junk food?
Loaves and fishes and all of that. Crazy Christ talk, I know, that feeding the poor thing.
I clicked through to see how far off my interpretation of Scripture and Erikson’s are. Mariana Trench and Everest.
What a piece of shit he is.
Cacti
@Mino:
Nah.
If you’re poor, you obviously can’t be trusted to make your own nutritional choices. That needs to be left to your economic betters.
Because after all, if you were smart, you wouldn’t be poor. Amiright?
Mino
@Cacti: I seem to remember ketsup being classified as a vege. See what a minefield.
And then all the Kelloggs would have to increase their lobbying of politicians, since that is the world we live in now.
RossInDetroit
@priscianusjr:
There used to be a Potato Chip and Snack Food Council, the PCSFC. I think it’s now the Snack Food Association (SFA). In the ‘70s they successfully lobbied the government to allow a wide range of prepared snack foods to be allowed under government food assistance. The argument given was that snack foods can be part of a healthy, balanced diet.
The real argument was ‘re-election is expensive’.
Snack Food Council. Here’s a clip from http://www.corporationsandhealth.org
Spaghetti Lee
I think lots of people here would agree that corporate control and degradation of the food supply is a big society-wide problem that needs to be addressed, but if one individual in that society wants some Oreos, then everyone needs to apparently just fuck off.
I’m absolutely not saying that any sort of food should be outlawed or even rationed or anything, but I do think that many, maybe most personal decisions about food, clothing, transportation, etc. have big political and social consequences on a macro scale, and that those connections should at least be allowed to be talked about without people getting all defensive.
I don’t think that guilt and shame are bad things, in the abstract. I don’t like the way Republicans have weaponized them and brought them into areas where they don’t belong, but I also don’t think “Everybody just do what they want and to hell with the consequences, and anyone who criticizes you is just an asshole” is a good idea either. It sounds closer to objectivism than anything to me.
S. cerevisiae
I think the poor should only be allowed to eat the nutritious food products from the Soylent Corporation.
Mino
@Spaghetti Lee: If you want to change food policy, start at the head of the line, not the end. Look at ag subsidies.
Cap'n Swag
While I seriously doubt the intent behind this Florida senator’s bill was pure, it’s not a bad idea at all.
Phylllis
@Lori: Judgy McJudgerson much, twit?
Judas Escargot, Your Postmodern Neighbor
It’s easy. Just stop feeding the poor, and they’ll eat themselves.
gelfling545
Before anyone presumes (and I believe it is presumptious) to dictate to low income people what their diet should consist of let them try the food stamp diet challenge.
Most “middle class” people can’t do it.(It’s about $4 per person per day.) The only reason to try to live off food stamps is that you have no choice and some want to take what little choice remains (selecting a preferred food) away as well.
I deal every day with folks on food stamps and, in general, their main goal is to buy enough of whatever will not leave them feeling hungry to last the month.
gelfling545
@S. cerevisiae: Or gruel. There’s always gruel.
Cacti
@Lori:
So, working at a grocery store gives you some special insight into nutrition and healthy foods?
I’ve been to doctors’ offices many times in my life. I guess I’m an expert in healthcare policy.
FlipYrWhig
@Cap’n Swag: Oddly enough, though, it’s totally irreconcilable with the usual idea that it’s busybody nanny-state liberals who want to take away our junk food, lightbulbs, asbestos, lead paint… Etc.
The Ancient Randonneur
I modestly propose someone write a clever story about how we can prevent the children of the poor from becoming a burden on our society.
Elizabelle
@Felinious Wench:
I was thinking about some of the CSA (Community Supported Agriculture) programs, where your subscription gives a local small farm a stream of income. In return, you get a box of fresh produce every few weeks (or whenever).
One problem: all that produce arriving at once can be a fridge/storage issue.
But thinking that it would be great to buy some CSA subscriptions — maybe along the lines of Heifer International — and have the food delivered to the families in need.
Or even a few boxes to a kitchen where volunteers and the kids/teens/whoever in the families could learn how to cook the produce in delicious ways.
We got a CSA box for a while, and sometimes it was “what the heck is THIS?” And then to the internet to figure out how to prepare it.
ETA: and not just families. For individuals too.
Cap'n Swag
@gelfling545:
I think liberals are keenly aware of the struggles of food stamp recipients. I have family members on food stamps and it’s awful.
However, the solution (to me) is to increase their allotment and cut out the shit food. It has nothing to do with dictating their diet, which sounds like something a goddamn Republican would say. It has everything to do with not subsidizing producers of junk food, and keeping poor people healthier.
Cacti
@FlipYrWhig:
Republicans want to punish the poor for their poverty.
“Progressives” just want to take their choices away for their own good.
Emma
@Elizabelle: So, now we liberals are stepping in to do exactly what we complain conservatives doing, which is getting into people’s faces about their private decisions? Sheesh.
jefft452
@Lori:
“I think social policy supporting healthy food makes sense, and that tax dollars should be used for healthy foods”
Legislators pay checks come from tax dollars
“I was surprised to see some of the people using food stamps were heavily overweight”
Ditto State and Federal legislators
“I think our food programs could not only eliminate hunger but simultaneously increase the health of our poorest citizens.”
And our richest too!
“but the limiting of food stamp dollars for healthy foods definitely does”
Clearly we need a law preventing any part of a state, Federal, or local paycheck from purchasing unhealthy foods, We can have elected officials submit a detailed accounting of every grocery item purchased with documented proof that not one cent of their paycheck went to anything unhealthy
Then drug test them
JerryN
You know, it’s not like the idea of limiting SNAP to healthy foods hasn’t come up once or twice in the past. Page 1 of this PDF is a good place to start with why it ain’t gonna happen.
Mino
@The Ancient Randonneur: There is always the GB Shaw solution.
Cacti
@Emma:
Poor = stupid
Haven’t you heard?
Cap'n Swag
There’s a difference about a mile wide between conservatives telling women how to have sex; telling people who they can and cannot marry, and telling people what they can and cannot do with food stamps.
Emma
@Elizabelle: Yes, because she doesn’t pass judgement. You did. Or, let me be fair, you came across as doing, whether it was intended or not.
Phylllis
@Lori:
Were you equally surprised to notice some of the people using other means to pay for groceries were heavily overweight as well? No? You’re still a twit.
Mino
@jefft452: Yes! Our own Hyde Amendment. After all, money is fungible, isn’t it?
Judas Escargot, Your Postmodern Neighbor
@Cacti:
If only they’d accept our Guidance. Then they wouldn’t need our Money.
aimai
@Nicole:
Its so ridiculous. We’ve known forever how to steer people towards healthier food: you make it cheaper, more available, and easier to cook. If there is a problem with poor families stretching their food dollars inappropriately the smartest thing to do would be to subidize fresh washed and cut vegetables for them by essentially giving them a coupon for fresh veggies that discounted it for them at the cash register. And put a tax on fritos etc… that make them more expensive for everyone.
Also, you could do this at a much higher level by stopping subidizing corn and sugar and starting subidizing farmer’s markets and local truck farming. One of the big steps forward in feeding poor people healthier food was when it was made possible for our local farmer’s markets to accept food stamps. I’ve seen plenty of elderly people using them at our local farmer’s market to buy veggies.
aimai
Cacti
@Cap’n Swag:
Fix’d.
jefft452
@Judas Escargot, Your Postmodern Neighbor: Give a man a fish,and he will not be hungry for a day
Starve a man to death and he will never be hungry again
Gretchen
Our jerk of a Republican governor has changed the rules so people have to prove citizenship to get food stamps. My friend who works at a grade-school has heartbreaking stories about children coming to school crying from hunger. I wish these jerks had to listen to these children cry while they’re giving bigger and bigger tax cuts to the well-off. It’s just sickening. And they’re so sanctimonious about “life”, at least until it concerns an already-born brown person. Just sickening.
And I don’t think limiting their choices even more will help the poor. Maybe that big cheap bag of tortilla chips fills the kid up better than asparagus. WIC is very hard to use because of the limitations on which specific package sizes, etc. are acceptable.
Emma
@Cap’n Swag: Then start with agricultural subsidies and tax breaks for manufacturers of the crap.
Cacti
@jefft452:
Build a man a fire, and he’s warm for a while. Set a man on fire, and he’s warm for the rest of his life.
Spaghetti Lee
@Cacti:
No, I haven’t heard, probably because no one in this thread has actually said that.
Elizabelle
@Emma:
I don’t know, Emma. Cacti is telling me and others that we hate the poor, and think they’re too stupid to make their own decisions.
I was just thinking it would be nice to see the kids (and adults) get introduced to some better food. That it’s too easy to grab for the junk food, digging one’s grave with one’s teeth, as it were.
Judge away there.
aimai
@Elizabelle:
There’s a reason why CSA’s are primarily for the upper class at this point. A) you have to have a ton of money all at once to hand over. B) you have to have really good storage and a fairly complicated ability to cook and store massive quantities of perishables–that’s why they call them perishables, because they are hard to keep for long. You have to either be willing to eat a stultifyingly tedious diet of collards the same way every day or you have to invest quite a bit of time and energy figuring out how to make that food different each day for several weeks.
The working poor don’t have that kind of flexibility, usually. This is no more a rational and thoughtful solution than any right wing one. Lower the prices of good/healthy food by subsidizing it at the maker or the cash register, tax the shit out of soda and fritos and candy both at the producer and the cash register (you can use the tax money for one to subsidize the other) and more or less you will end up with a healthier populace.
aimai
catclub
@Davis X. Machina: Very Well put.
Mino
@aimai: This.
Food Channel did a Wasted-food segment recently. We have an abundance of good food available but no distribution system to get it where it’s needed. A 2002 study reported that 50% of edible food is wasted in this country.
Nicole
@JerryN: That’s a great PDF, thanks for the link. Money quote from the first page:
“No evidence exists that food stamp participation contributes to poor diet quality or obesity.
• There is no strong research-based evidence to support restricting food stamp benefits. Food stamp
recipients are no more likely than higher income consumers to choose foods with little nutritional
value; thus the basis for singling out low-income food stamp recipients and restricting their food
choices is not clear. “
catclub
@aimai: I can never read CSA without a different association (emphasis on ASS) coming to mind.
Lori
For the people here who think that there should be no limits on what kind of ‘food’ food stamps can be used to purchase:
1) Quotes used in previous sentence since I disagree, and don’t believe soda or candy is food.
2) Do you think that people receiving Medicare/Medicaid should be able to get any kind of medical care whatsoever, and it is wrong to decide what doesn’t get covered by tax money? For instance, plastic surgery like nose jobs without medical conditions is A-okay for tax dollars? Since the surgeries are done by doctors, that makes nosejobs ‘medical procedures’ the same way candy and soda are sold at groceries so they are called ‘food’. If you think it’s okay to determine some medical procedures get covered and some not, then why not the same with items sold at a grocery store?
Cap'n Swag
@jefft452:
Talk about false equivalencies. Legislators, whether we like it or not, are employees and they receive paychecks, though I wouldn’t object to them practicing what they preach. Food stamp recipients are not.
Nicole
@aimai: I agree, I’m heartened by the signs at the small farmer’s markets here in NYC that they accept food stamps. And that they seem to be proliferating.
I agree, it’s about cost, ease of consumption, and accessibility. At this point, it takes time, effort and money to eat well in the US, and the poor have the least amounts of any of those three.
There was a Gawker article about “look how disgusting frozen dinners are!” which was followed by the self-righteous commenters discussing how much cheaper it is to cook your own food. To which I thought, “Sure. If your time isn’t worth anything to you.” I’m always amazed when people don’t factor in time to the cost of something.
FlipYrWhig
@Mino: That Food Network show was amazing. I never felt so guilty about picking over the apple bin to find un-bruised ones.
Cacti
@Lori:
Cough
“There is no strong research-based evidence to support restricting food stamp benefits. Food stamp recipients are no more likely than higher income consumers to choose foods with little nutritional value; thus the basis for singling out low-income food stamp recipients and restricting their food choices is not clear.”
Svensker
@Cacti:
Yup.
Betty Cracker
@aimai: That makes a lot of sense.
Cap'n Swag
@Cacti:
Right. It’s being condescending to tell people receiving government money how it should be used.
Elizabelle
@aimai:
Yeah, I think you’re right about subsidizing good food and taxing crap food.
Cap'n Swag
@Emma:
No argument there.
Cacti
@Cap’n Swag:
Cough
“There is no strong research-based evidence to support restricting food stamp benefits. Food stamp recipients are no more likely than higher income consumers to choose foods with little nutritional value; thus the basis for singling out low-income food stamp recipients and restricting their food choices is not clear.”
Mino
@Lori:
1) Quotes used in previous sentence since I disagree, and don’t believe soda or candy is food.
We are required to debate in your reality?
2) Do you think that people receiving Medicare/Medicaid should be able to get any kind of medical care whatsoever, and it is wrong to decide what doesn’t get covered by tax money? For instance, plastic surgery like nose jobs without medical conditions is A-okay for tax dollars? Since the surgeries are done by doctors, that makes nosejobs ‘medical procedures’ the same way candy and soda are sold at groceries so they are called ‘food’. If you think it’s okay to determine some medical procedures get covered and some not, then why not the same with items sold at a grocery store?
Leaving Medicaid out of it for the moment, Medicare operates like most other insurance systems: cosmetic proceedures are not covered. And Medicare is an insurance program, not a taxpayer give-away.
Medicaid is actually more generous in some instances than Medicare. Probably because we voted to be of more assistance to people with fewer resources.
Svensker
@aimai:
I lived for a while in a neighborhood that was primarily “the projects” and was shocked at what the one local supermarket carried — it was mostly crap, veggies were old and tired, milk was past due date, meat was shitty — and how expensive it was. Half a mile away in the richer part of town, there were two supermarkets that had good veggies, fruit, milk and meat, with a big selection, at a much lower price than the poor neighborhood store. Apparently this is very common.
And let’s not mention that in some poor areas, kitchens are rudimentary at best, fuel for cooking is expensive, and the time to cook — if the cook even has the skills — is limited. The thing about healthy “poor” food (as opposed to el cheapo mac ‘n’ faux cheese and other crap) is that it takes skill and time to prepare. You can make an excellent, nutritious and inexpensive soup out of a small piece of bony meat, some dried beans and some wilted vegetables, but it takes hours and knowledge.
Polar Bear Squares
I’m in the minority here but as a Christian I get the feeling a lot of these assholes are going to be fairly disappointed when they die and the scream to the heavens about how they dedicated their lives to persecuting liberals, treehuggers and those dirty pinko feminazis and Jesus turns to them and says, “fuck I look like? Ronald Reagan? Get in the rich assshole line. That’s down the block. The help-a-starving-family-get-foodstamps-line? That’s up front.”
Emma
@Elizabelle: I agree with you but you came across as lecturing. I don’t think you meant to do it. But when someone like Cacti, who has to feed a family on probably about $130 per person (that’s the latest number here in Florida) that you support placing even more restrictions on how she can do it FOR HER OWN GOOD, it makes you sound rather condescending. Sometimes canned soup and some cookies can be the difference between a kid being hungry and going to bed and getting a good night sleep.
EDIT: that amount is per month.
Nicole
@Elizabelle:
Absolutely, but when that is attempted you see exactly what we’re up against. A five cent soda tax was proposed here in NYC, and the TV was awash in commercials about how the state was trying to bust the family grocery budget. To watch them, you’d have thought soda and sports drinks were an essential part of a daily diet.
I do believe you’re coming at it from a place of wanting people’s lives to be better, but I think our goal should be focused on the issues further up the line, that make processed food cheap and fresh food expensive.
Also, I live in a primarily minority neighborhood with a lot of churches and every week there are long lines outside them for weekly food donations. I see my neighbors in huge long lines for canned goods and produce and whatever is being donated. It breaks my heart because they’re struggling and doing their best. I just can’t find it in me to be upset that they may be buying cookies or candy or soda with food stamps. I can’t punish them for buying the same treats those of us not on public assistance reward ourselves with all the time.
Emma
@Lori: You know you’re losing the fight when the false equivalencies come out to play. A nose job is optional; eating is not. See how that works?
Amir Khalid
Since junk food is known to be unhealthy, it’s arguably a good thing to forbid poor people on food assistance to buy them. I get that. On the other hand, junk food is probably just about the nearest thing to a luxury such people can afford; it seems patronizing and heartless to tell them no, they can’t have that.
Plus, as I understand, in America there are other issues: whether poor city residents have ready access to fresh fruit and vegetable markets; or the time and energy to prepare them after a day at a physically grueling low-income job. (Or in some cases a decent home kitchen, or adequate cooking skills — the poor are deprived of more than money, after all.)
It wouldn’t be enough, by itself, to forbid the use of food assistance to buy junk food. You’d also have to ensure the healthier alternative was available and practical.
Elizabelle
@Emma:
Well, I am sorry if I came across as condescending.
Cassidy
@Elizabelle: No. You don’t get to that. Michelle Obama tried to start a national campaign/dialogue on healthier eating and a more active lifestyle for everyone. Not just thos you and people like you have determined to be not morally sound enough. She was villified for the right and made fun of for trying to help us be a healthier nation. You don’t get to wear that bloody shirt. You are making moral judgements. NOt the same, not fucking close.
gelfling545
@Cap’n Swag: People who subsist on food stamps are people reduced to relatively few choices in their lives. If some of those few remaining choices promote the little enjoyment/entertainment factor I would not want to take it away. I think too many people visualize those on food stamps walking int a supermarket and rejecting all types of healthy food and heading for the snack aisle. The reality is (although it is changing as more people who never imagined it end up on food stamps in suburban areas) the 24/7 at the corner is often the only place many can reliable get access to in order to purchase food. There you can get milk, bread and a selection of miserable processed foods at outrageous prices. Soda, by the way, has a number of advantages if you’re poor. It costs WAY less than other, healthier, drinks, it won’t go bad on you if you don’t have a refrigerator and it’s pretty high calorie so it will keep you going for a while.
You have to have a means of cooking to get food stamps but it that means is only a microwave or one working burner on a stove home cooking becomes more an aspiration that a reality. There are so many barriers. I see folks every day who need to ask around to borrow a pan if they want to do more than microwave something in a bowl. Do they have a can opener? a knife to slice foods to prepare? I think too many people view those on food stamps having the same means to cook, just without the food. This is not the case although, again, the “new poor” may still have better set-ups than average.Those just coming back from homelessness have NOTHING. It’s hard to imagine if you don’t see it and it’s easy to look at it as an aberration, a rarity unless you see it often.
As far as subsidizing the snack industry, if “middle class” people rejected the snack.fast food choices those industries would wither on the vine. To me it’s not about subsidizing one type of food or another, it’s about getting people fed and leaving them a bit of dignity.
jacy
@Amir Khalid:
Very nicely and succinctly put. There are so many problems upline of the actual check-out line that anybody saying “Let’s make sure poor people don’t give their kids cookies” is all at once heartless, uninformed, and impractical.
Unless your job creation plan is to add cupboard inspectors to counter-top inspectors.
Mino
@gelfling545: Latch-key children are doing the cooking in many instances, too.
John S.
@Emma:
Speaking of false equivalencies… It’s necessary for people to eat Oreos for survival? Nabisco’s marketing department would very much like to subscribe to your newsletter peddling that horseshit.
Cap'n Swag
And if people wouldn’t elect Republicans, we wouldn’t be in illegal wars. This is not a solution.
Mino
@gelfling545: As far as subsidizing the snack industry, if “middle class” people rejected the snack.fast food choices those industries would wither on the vine.
Amen.
Did it work? My first attempt at blockquotes.
Nope.
Gretchen
Food stamps have been cut so much that children are going hungry. Putting more limits on what people can buy won’t help. In our ideal middle class world, we have the time and the means to drive to several grocery stores, look up healthy recipes on the internet, etc. Somebody who is working 3 part-time jobs and trying to take care of their kids, feed them and clothe them in severly limited circumstances, don’t need more limitations. And food stamp allocations are small enough that it’s very difficult to buy enough healthy food. Sometimes there is a choice between a little healthy food, and something calorie-dense that will fill them up. These kids are going hungry, and we’re arguing about limiting their choices so they’ll get more vegetables!
Cap'n Swag
To sum this up, we should keep allowing food stamp recipients to purchase junk food because otherwise they won’t eat. There are no other means of fixing this program other than to give people more money to buy food that will eventually lead to poor health.
Makes so much sense now.
jacy
And I think a lot of scolds have never been really, truly poor. Many years ago I did literally live out of my car for about six weeks, with two small children. I was lucky enough and that this was a very temporary situation that I never had to repeat, but it was one I never thought I’d find myself in. Let me tell you, it’s really hard to cook anything or store anything in an old Toyota Tercel, regardless of how clever you are.
Much as I’m tempted as a normal human being — I never ever make a judgment about somebody else’s grocery cart.
Elizabelle
Here’s something I really want to say, though:
I waded into this mostly to support Lori, because I think she’s mostly been honest enough to tell you what a lot of people (cashiers, fellow shoppers, a lot of the general public, etc.) think. You may or may not agree, but I hate the piling on here (Lori, you’re such a dolt. Elizabelle: you’re an elitist. Let us enlighten you.)
I am glad that we have food stamps and cash assistance. I believe in paying taxes and having a civil society.
I do not begrudge the poor or anyone else their treats (and said so upstream). Also realize that many stores in underserved areas don’t give you much you can buy on limited means. I’ve seen it. I see what gets donated to food banks, too, and a lot of it is real questionable.
But we, as a whole society, are digging our graves with our teeth. Obesity-related diseases increase. Parents are afraid to let their kids run the neighborhood for hours, as a lot of us did when we were little, and a lot of kids prefer electronic entertainment anyway. (Same for us! We’re here on the internet.)
I’m glad the discussion turned to potential solutions on how you get healthier food to those who need it.
I wish we did more of this, and bless Erick Erickson’s absent soul for getting us together on it.
YellowJournalism
I am quite curious as to Lori’s criteria for the clinical diagnosis of obesity in the check-out line. Fat ass? Moobies on men? Muffin top? Wearing pajama bottoms? Or did you weigh them and bring out the BMI calculator every time?
Sorry, your heart may be in the right place in wanting people to be make healthier choices, but I’m a bit uncomfortable with the college undergrad studying who-knows-what deciding what’s best for welfare recipients based on how they appear physically. It comes off more as “fat ass doesn’t need that bag of oreos” rather than “we all need to choose more healthy options and keep snacks to a minimum.”
Elizabelle
@Cassidy:
Cassidy, don’t personalize this.
And that’s true, it’s good advice for everyone.
John S.
@Amir Khalid:
I agree with you about access to healthy alternatives. Interestingly enough, I just returned from shopping at Wal-Mart where damn near the entire produce department is tagged as eligible for WIC (Florida’s program). And you know what? A 3 pound bag of apples cost less than a fucking bag of Oreos.
I’m not in favor of restricting people’s access to food out of spite or misguided morality. You want to buy Oreo’s with your food stamps, go right ahead. But people here are having two different arguments and simply talking past each other.
Elizabelle
@John S.:
John, you have said it so much better than I have.
Woodrowfan
@Davis X. Machina:
Agreed. Moreover, maybe it’s not any of our damn business if someone wants a bag of chips instead of a bag of green beans.
Cassidy
@Lori:
And you’re done. Stripes exposed. Go back to Red State.
Woodrowfan
@Cassidy: HEAR HEAR!
Mino
@Cap’n Swag: Well, we could give them choice: foodstamps or healthcare, but not both??
Cassidy
@Elizabelle: I’m sorry, but this is personal. You want “honesty”? Here’s some honesty for you. I’m on food stamps in Florida. I got out of the Army, after 13 years, because I got tired of missing my children grow up. I couldn’t find a job and was unemployed. I woke up every day thinking about eating my gun and giving my wife nd kids a $400K insurance policy. I was fortunate, life savingly fortunate, to get on food stamps and feed my family of 6. I worried nightly about the rent, but my kids had full bellys. I ate one time a day to make sure and stretch what we had and insure my children didn’t go hungry.
I exercise 6 days a week. I buy the best food I can for my family (I do the grocery shopping). I buy easy meals for my wife to make when I’m working (5 days a week, the late shift). YOU DON’T GET TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR MY FAMILY.
Yes this is personal. You are condescending. You are judging people with no basis in fact or reality.
Mino
@Cassidy: Well, you little thread killer. Heh. Reality is the shits. Too many of us prefer the neatness of theory.
I’m proud of you.
Elizabelle
Wow, Cassidy. Pleasure to “meet” you, and I’m sorry for what you are going through. Also sorry for being personally condescending. Didn’t mean to be.
If you promise no further talk on eating a gun, not another word from me on Cheetos madness.
At its root, this thread is — in various forms — concern (maybe misplaced, maybe not) about kids and other vulnerable people going to bed full of crap food.
Or no food.
In our rich, Christian nation.
Cassidy
@Elizabelle: Things are better, now. I’m working, etc. Nice to meet you too. :)
The whole point is that I get to make those decisions for my family. Me and my wife. No one else. Yes, I buy my kids snacks with my FS money. I also buy large amounts of apples and bannanas and grapes. And they all disappear.
Crap food is better than no food. The sad fact is that it’s is incredibly expensive to eat healthy. I would imagine, and my experience is as anecdotal as Lori’s, poor people on FS eat healthier than lower middle class families. The assistance money gives us the option to buy fresh fruits and veggies, something you can’t do on lower middle class income that puts you outside the [constantly being lowered] income cap.
Elizabelle
I’m glad you’re back. Was very sorry to have insulted or hurt you.
Donut
@gelfling545
Great post, very well said. I think done of the preachiness we are seeing in this thread comes from people who have not really lived in poverty.
When I was really broke , I managed to get a job at a restaurant, which paid the rent on my 200 sq ft, roach infested efficiency apt. But I was also able to eat two meals per day there free – not because I was supposed to, because I stole, basically. Also, I stole food from the walk in. Meat. I also snagged cooking equipment that the pros working the line could no longer use.
When I finally got promoted from salad bar guy to a line cook, I got a little raise and no longer had to steal to survive. I would have gone hungry otherwise, though.
It’s easy to spout off about ideal conditions where poor folks can be advised how to eat well, but it’s a lot less practical in reality.
Really, as said above, you want poor people to make better choices, you get them more income. It’s not that hard to figure out.
Chris
@GregB:
That really does cover it. If you’re more concerned about the right of states to practice slavery than the right of people not to be slaves, if you’re more concerned about the rights of corporations to mistreat its employees than the right of people not to be mistreated, you’re a conservative.
Same basic principle as when thugs like Saddam or Milosevic whine about imperialism and national sovereignty whenever the international community takes offense to their crimes.
Jebediah
@Cassidy:
I believe someone has already proposed that, or something very similar. I can’t remember who or where, and I don’t recall if it was a legislator actually proposing a bill or just saying “we ought to do this” – but the gist was families on public assistance should be required to only shop in thrift/second-hand stores for clothes. Because I guess some of them weren’t looking thread-bare enough, or something. Maybe someone here will remember some of the details. But the GOP seems to have an endless supply if ideas about how to punish and shame the poor.
I’m glad to hear your situation has improved – can’t say for sure that I would have the stones to get through what you did. Good for you having the strength to do it.
Nicole
@Elizabelle:
And, to reflect back on John’s earlier post, this why liberals are doomed. We just can’t stay maintain our outrage long enough; we’re too interested in talking through issues and coming to an amicable place. ;)
I’m glad you and Lori brought up your viewpoints, because it made for a really interesting thread and I think it got us through to a big rub of the issue- that Big Agriculture is very interested in keeping us dependent on cheap, processed food. And that it’s just freaking wrong that a country this wealthy has kids going hungry, ever.
Nicole
@John S.:
And takes up more space and doesn’t stay edible nearly as long. As people have said upthread, part of the problem is not just what the food is, it’s also it’s storage, and how often it has to be replaced. Gas isn’t covered by food stamps and I imagine people drive to get to your Wal Mart.
gwangung
Yeah, being grounded in the reality of being on food stamps really, really, really helps inform the discussion.
I remember an endless discussion with a male conservative. He couldn’t quite get that there’s a difference in trying to shop for a young, single male and trying to shop for AND WITH a young child
Elizabelle
@Nicole:
Yeah, the poor are monolithic. One size fits all, hmm?
I think “liberals are doomed” if there has to be only one reality.
Gretchen
@JohnS: and the bag of Oreos has a lot more calories than a bag of apples. If you’re having trouble affording enough calories so your kids stomachs aren’t growling, apples aren’t it.
satby
Funny, I saw the list of food that Repug wants to limit for those on FS and the first thought I had was that the bitch didn’t want a poor mother to be able to have a little birthday party for their kids. But then, I’ve been poor too. A snack size bag of potato chips was a rare treat for my kids, as was an occasional soda (in fact, soda was only for birthday parties) YMMV.
jefft452
@gelfling545: “People who subsist on food stamps are people reduced to relatively few choices in their lives. If some of those few remaining choices promote the little enjoyment/entertainment factor I would not want to take it away”
Hear! Hear!
ruemara
@Lori: I know you mean well and I appreciate what you are saying. As a person who has both been on foodstamps and who has written about the concept of ‘food deserts’, I’d like to expand on the issues of poverty and hunger in America. Often, these unhealthy choices are being made due to issues of immediate convenience, lack of knowledge about preparation and lack of access. Many poor families don’t have a good kitchen. They may not have decent refrigeration, or access to a burner or oven. They may not know how to prepare simple meals that are healthier such as lentil soup or a pot of beans, or they may not have a space to store cooked food. When parents work 2 or 3 jobs a piece, they may not be physically able to prepare food, or have the time to do so, when they need to rest. Kids may not be able to cook without supervision. There’s also the issue of portability. Can you get your food home without a car? Can you afford the bigger better folding shopping cart or just a small rickety one? Should you limit your purchase to just canned items or cut back on the bulk of those so you can have some fresh meat? It’s more than just poor people buy unhealthy food. It’s a collection of deeper influences that just tossing some restriction onto those who are getting food stamps.
boss bitch
@Lori @Elizabelle: When those in need go to sign up for food stamps or financial help, it is not an opportunity for you to turn it into an extreme makeover. You are implying that the reason they are poor is because they eat the wrong foods. Um, no. Your first priority is to find them a decent paying job so they won’t have to come back to the welfare office. Even give them the skills they need to find a decent paying job.
And if you are still hell bent on being their mommy then how about increasing the amount each family or individual gets and pushing to have better produce and markets in poor neighborhoods. Have you seen the produce in a poor neighborhood? Have you seen the “healthy” selections at these places? Restricting people to certain foods AND making them take drug tests is just bullshit. What’s next? A weekly weigh-in? Mandatory visits to the church? Get these people a fucking job and stop trying to impose your habits or beliefs on them.
Also, I don’t want to hear this “its my tax dollars” bullshit. IT IS THE RECIPIENT’S tax dollars also, remember? We all pay into the system and most continue to pay in since many food stamp recipients are still WORKING!
Is this how it works? My tax dollars fund the safety net and should I go ask for help out of this fund, its OK to treat me like shit? I don’t have any rights over my life anymore?
henqiguai
Oh, why not one more, very late, pile-on, eh?
Lori, on your observation of the weight problems of too many people you observed on food stamps (though studies have shown it’s an issue for any poor community). The foods generally available to the very poor, even in these food affluent United States, promote weight issues. The food generally available and/or meeting the criteria of availability, affordability, satiation, accessibility (i.e. can be acquired, can be prepared, can be stored), plus all those things said above, constituting the bulk of a family’s diet, will almost definitely ensure a tendency to obesity; or at least overweight conditions.
Another Halocene Human
Storms sucks. Actually, the food stamp program already regulates what you can buy with food stamps and the Obama administration has been quietly, and without spooking BigAgra, attempting to use evidence-based medicine to make the program more nutritionally sound.
The truth is that these sweet treats are being purchased by Grandma. Senator Storms knows very well that you would have to reach Grandma (with a targeted education campaign) for these childrens’ total nutrition to improve, but would-be social dominators like the good state senator prefer a world where their children have a leg up on everyone else’s.
Another Halocene Human
Okay, my bad, it’s actually WIC that regulates the heck out of food assistance and SNAP apparently takes a lighter touch. Either way, state-level food stamp regulation just seems to be a way of piling on red tape and aggravation for recipients at the register … just more shame, misery, and wasted time for people already working too many hours for too little pay and spending too much of their life waiting in line. Which is exactly what the mean-spirited Republicans in the Florida state senate want. (If you doubt me, read Carl Hiassen’s columns about the current crowd in Tallahassee from early last year.)
Rick Scott is trying to add red tape and aggravation to people on unemployment insurance and to those who are using the Florida unemployment offices (FloridaWorks–oh, the Orwellian names never stop–Scott is proliferating them in fact) to try to GET a damn job. Right wing republicans HATE bureaucracy when it means environmental regulations that prevent big farms and businesses from polluting our rivers and air… er, I mean “externalizing costs”, but lovelovelove it when it means they can shake their bony fingers at the poor they’re busy kicking with their fine italian leather heels and lifts.
Cowbelle
This thread is full of an embarrassing number of judgmental non-poor women saying really asinine things about food stamps.
Teresa
At the grocery store where I shop I see many many signs saying if the product is allowed for food stamps or not. What goes through my mind is this: “My god what a bunch of nasty assholes to be so fucking petty and abusive that they demand to control the shopping of another.”
That’s what I think about America’s twisted view of the poor. It’s more of a reflection on those in power. Far too many of them are abusive arseholes.