.@reppaulryan This guy is fuckin' clueless: "Paul Ryan: Poor kids should go hungry so they know they're loved"

At CPAC, Paul Ryan has framed the cruelty of letting poor kids go hungry in a framweork where cuts  to welfare are justified because poor kids are empowered to strive to be like those kids with their own brown paper bag lunches who have parents who love them. Which means Liberals believe its more important to feed hungry kids than to fix the problems at home. The problem is that moms who married deadbeat men love their kids as much as other moms. But sometimes, there isnt enough money to pay all the bills and buy groceries and get clean clothes and tithe to the church. That mom with two kids, struggling to make ends meet sometimes needs help.

This is the cruelty of the GOP. Its message of self empowerment and self reliance is delivered by an appealing looking mouth breather like Paul Ryan but it's underlying message is simple: if you can't make it on your own, fuck off. I got mine, who cares about you, even if you're a hungry kid at school.

from http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/06/1282611/-Paul-Ryan-Poor-kids-should-go-hungry-so-they-know-they-re-loved?detail=facebook#

http://youtu.be/6aHPsPwVLBg

"Rep. Paul Ryan waxed eloquent at CPAC Thursday on how completely Republicans understand the American people, in stark contrast to how "the left" is offering people "a full stomach and an empty soul." Offering children a stomach full of school lunch, to be precise.

Ryan cited a story he heard from Eloise Anderson, who "serves in the cabinet of my buddy Scott Walker." Anderson told Ryan of an encounter with:

... a young boy from a very poor family, and every day at school he would get a free lunch from a government program. He told Eloise he didn’t want a free lunch. He wanted his own lunch, one in a brown paper bag, just like the other kids.

He wanted one, he said, because he knew a kid with a brown paper bag had someone who cared for him. This is what the left does not understand.

Hey, maybe if we take that kid's free school lunch away, his parents will be able to scrounge up a brown paper bag to send him to school with every day. It'll be empty, like his stomach, but whatever, brown paper bag = love.

What the left doesn't understand, apparently, is that this child should go hungry because it's been made clear to him that being poor means his parents somehow love him less. Trust Ryan to miss the pathos of a child having been taught this. And what about kids whose parents send them to school with lunch money, not brown paper bags, because both of their parents work and do not have time to be packing a lunch every day? Ryan's version of parental love doesn't make room for them either. What else might he require for a family to qualify as loving—a mother who meets the kids at the door after school bearing freshly baked cookies?

If you're middle class and living a 1950s sitcom lifestyle, there's room for you in Paul Ryan's vision of non-empty souls. But, as poll after poll shows, American voters prefer a Democratic vision of a higher minimum wage, unemployment aid, Social Security, and a host of other programs that Ryan's "empty soul" rhetoric is designed to cheapen."

rest http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/06/1282611/-Paul-Ryan-Poor-kids-should-go-hungry-so-they-know-they-re-loved?detail=facebook#