A lesson in irony

[joedog]

The Food Stamp Program administered by the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, is actually proud of the fact it is distributing the greatest amount of free meals and food stamps ever.
Meanwhile, the National Park Service, administered by the U.S. Dept. of the Interior, asks us to "Please Do Not Feed the Animals."
Their stated reason for the policy.'because the animals will grow dependent on handouts and will not learn to take care of themselves'.


DISCLAIMER: This is/isn't my thoughts! Got it out of a fishing paper I get.
I FULLY SUPPORT THE FOODSHARE, FOOD STAMP AND ANY OTHER SYSTEM THAT FEEDS AMERICANS!
I will/have/do help in food sharing especially families with children.
This statement I feel shows how one hand of Gov. has no idea of the other hands reasonings or actions. Not on the same page.
It also shows how a Gov. Program can be EXCITED that WE are in the worst place in our culture since it's inception.


If you are UNFORTUNATE enough that these programs are a NECESITY for your family DO NOT HESITATE TO PM ME, I may be willing to help.

Please DO NOT LET THIS THREAD TURN UGLY!
I really am not very politically active but in Wisconsin we have been BOMBARDED with politics for the last four years. I feel strongly that our system is broken. Think how many families WE could feed if we just used all the campaign dollars WASTED to feed HUMANS.

But how much money are we talking about? The FEC reported in October 2006 that Congressional candidates had raised $1.14 billion in that two-year election cycle. In comparison, the FEC reported in June 2005 that candidates spent $1.16 billion in the 2003-2004 cycle. PAC contributions represented only 27% of the total spent. The FEC did not report end-of cycle expenditures for the 2006 election.






Most PAC money is contributed to incumbents, not challengers. Here are FEC data on contributions to challengers:

• 2006 : $36.3 (10%)
• 2004 : $22.3 (7%)
• 2002 : $28.5 (10%)
• 2000 : $27.5 (11%)
• 1998 : $22.1 (10%)
• 1996 : $31.5% (15%)

If you really want to know the cost of HIRING LIARS
http://www.cfinst.org/data/VitalStats.aspx
This is just house and senate spending...NOT PRESIDENTIAL election money! Heck Wisconsin spent like over 60 MILLION just on the Governor Recall election, not to mention the other recalls.
http://blogs.mcclatchydc.com/washing...s-records.html
This is why our system is broken!

[bassboogieman]

Their stated reason for the policy - 'because the animals will grow dependent on handouts and will not learn to take care of themselves'.

True or False? My answers are given in parenthies, for those that wish to check their work against mine.

People are animals (true)

The Interior Dept, actually did research and based conclusions not on WILD animals but those on government assistance (not actually true, but I thought it funny if not believable).

It's also been proven that human intervention (as good intentioned as it may be) will reduce/eliminate a "wild" animal's ability to fend for itself in as little as ONE generation. (true)

Domestication of animals is partially achieved by making the target animal dependant upon the master (bad choice of words, but it fits) primarily for it's FOOD and shelter. (true)

Therefore the logigal deduction that can be made is one side of the isle wants to domisticate the population, the other wishes to return us to the wild. So do you want to be a dog or a wolf? (just a deduction, not determined as whether true or untrue)

But one thing is for certain - politicians forget what they say, what they said cannot be generally applied, but specifically applies in order to maintain deniablilty when previous statements are attempted to be applied to another example. Politics is just so confusing, none of them mean what they said yesterday, but will tell you to your face they mean what they say today. The ultimate oxymoron IS: HONEST POLITICIAN, they went extinct long before the Dodo Bird. (personal pbservation, therefore it is TRUE for me)

All research was done on the internet, which we all know is renowned for truth, honesty and factual, documented examples.

[Dogmatic]

Really? Comparing the mostly working poor with wild animals in National Parks?

[mike234]

Have heard this tale for a couple of years now. Man that told me swears it is true but I believe it is just a tale but is indictative of how some act in my part of the country who get food stamps.

Man in grocery line and get to register and starts to put food on counter. Lays a bag of dog food on counter and casher tells him "Sir food stamps will not pay for this".
Says OK and tells wife to keep putting products on counter and he will return.
In a few moments he returns with a dozen steaks in a grocery basket and tells the cashier (please pardon my profanity). "By God it will pay for this won't it". He purchases the steaks for dog.
As I said I think it is a tale but could see it happening will some peoples attitude. I know there are times people need help and this is what they were meant to do but in my area we have 3rd generation of families who are on the food stamps. I can see with the way things are a person would need them if they were laid off but these [people do not stay on the food stamps long as they look for jobs and usually find them.
I am in favor of the assistance for the families with their medical help as I have done surgery on them that without they would have died. Also the medical and Rx help for the children.
There are always a bunch of "bad apples" that take advantage of the system no matter what it is providing. They make everyone on these programs look bad.
If a person is out of work or needs help in these hard times. Get the food stamps and other help these programs provide. The people that have never worked and taught their children to use these programs so they will not have to work can take a cut in their benefits and get a job mowing lawns or carrying groceries to peoples cars. Then they can lose some of the weight that is slowly killing them and live a few years longer.