The number of people living in poverty is at a 15-year high, national job growth has stalled again, and the Obama administration just extended unemployment benefits another 13 months because people can't support themselves or their families.
Meanwhile, National Review editor Kate O'Beirne is understandably pissed that poor people are indoctrinating their poor children on how to suckle from the sacred government cash cow by way of federal sponsored school breakfast and lunch programs. At a Republican strategy meeting last week, she called poor people "criminally negligent parents" and then solved our school-age hunger problem by advising poor kids to go eat a banana. O'Beirne's comments, below, via Crooks and Liars:
The federal school lunch program and now breakfast program and I guess in Washington DC, dinner program are pretty close to being sacred cows… broad bipartisan support. And if we’re going to ask more of ourselves, my question is what poor excuse for a parent can’t rustle up a bowl of cereal and a banana? I just don’t get why millions of school children qualify for school breakfasts unless we have a major wide spread problem with child neglect.
You know, I mean if that’s how many parents are incapable of pulling together a bowl of cereal and a banana, then we have problems that are way bigger than… that problem can’t be solved with a school breakfast, because we have parents who are just criminally… ah… criminally negligent with respect to raising children.
And yet, that’s the kind of program that has huge bipartisan support with very little thought about why we’re now feeding children. Talk about a fundamental parental responsibility. In what sense can we begin asking the “more of ourselves” piece to go with this less government?
True negligence would be poor parents taking their children out of these programs and letting them starve. True stupidity is advocating that they do so.