Search This Blog

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

flying when you see no compassion

I heard this story on NPR the other day...
Hard to believe that someone actually thinks that way.
Then thinks it is OK to write down your thoughts.
The tears you are not crying for Argentina? Cry them for Missouri since they have this woman in their statehouse.
I borrowed this post from another blog I was reading...
We can all aim higher than the thoughts of Cynthia Davis of MO.

Cynthia Davis, “Pro-Life” Republican: Let Them Eat…Nothing. July 9th, 2009

I’ve long believed that most “pro-life” people care only about the fetus.
They’re passionate about “life” so long as that life is, or is potentially, in a woman’s uterus.
But actual born life is nothing but a burden to them, and they’ll be darned if a single dollar of their tax money is going to one of those (enter disparaging term here).
A stunning example of this is Missouri State Representative Cynthia Davis. Davis’s June Newsletter essentially blames poor people for being poor, spews the standard RW line that the government (taxpayers) shouldn’t have to support them, and claims that going hungry is a good thing (it’s motivating!) and that children should get jobs if they want food.

"…..Anyone under 18 can be eligible? Can’t they get a job during the summer by the time they are 16?
Hunger can be a positive motivator. What is wrong with the idea of getting a job so you can get better meals?"

"Tip: If you work for McDonald’s, they will feed you for free during your break."
Never mind about the fact that it’s utterly impossible for every 16-17 year old to get a job.

What does Davis suggest for the children who are under 16?
Should they panhandle on the streets so she doesn’t have to give up a few pennies more in taxes? Or should they just go hungry all summer so they’ll be really, really motivated when school re-opens in September?

"While nobody is disputing the benefits of nutritious food, why the presumption that parents are not providing nutritious food for their children? Even if they are not, who created a new rule that says government must make up for any lack at home?
The problem of childhood obesity has been cited as one of the most rapidly growing health problems in America. People who are struggling with lack of food usually do not have an obesity problem."

Why is Davis linking hungry children and obese children? Oh, that’s right. She’s one of those RWers who assume if you’re poor it’s because you’re lazy, and you sit around the house stuffing your face with bon-bons all day.

"They are using a “crisis” to create an expansion of a government program. Parents naturally love their children and enjoy caring for their children just as much as ever during an economic downturn. Most parents put their children first, even ahead of themselves no matter what. If parents are laid off, that doesn’t mean they stop feeding their children, at least not any of the parents I know. Laid off parents could adapt by preparing more home cooked meals rather than going out to eat."

Again Davis is blaming the victims and making baseless presumptions. Why does she assume parents of hungry children are eating out rather than preparing meals at home? And where does she think these laid off parents are going to get the money to prepare these meals at home? There’s a reason people are relying on food kitchens, government food programs and the like. Many laid off people are struggling to pay their rent/mortgage, utilities and other critical bills. Afterward they have little or nothing left over for food. They’re not eating at soup kitchens because they think it’s haute cuisine. They’re doing it because they’re desperate.

"Who’s buying dinner? Who is getting paid to serve the meal? Churches and other non-profits can do this at no cost to the taxpayer if it is warranted. That is what they did when Louisiana had a hurricane."

Under the “Faith Based Initiative” churches and other religious organizations get government funding (taxpayer money) for their programs. So there is a cost to the taxpayer for what they do.

"When churches offer a meal, they can serve the individual with a sense of love and caring for those less fortunate. Government cannot match that. Bigger governmental programs take away our connectedness to the human family, our brotherhood and our need for one another.
There are human beings working in the secular and government-run charities just like there are in the religious charities. They’re often as loving and caring for the people they provide services to. Sometimes they’re more caring and loving because they don’t provide proselytizing and moralizing the way some religious charities do–often as a condition for receiving services."

And who is Davis to speak of loving and caring for “the less fortunate” when she’s spent her entire newsletter tearing them down? Typical RRRW hypocrisy.
I really have to ask….does the RRRW attract people who have congenital flaws in their hearts and minds, or does being a RRRWer cause the damage to hearts and minds? That’s the end of my rant on Cynthia Davis, who has a heart-shaped hole in her heart.

But I’d be remiss if I didn’t direct you to this one at Zaius Nation. This one is rather randy.

No comments: