Western Rifle Association has a piece up by Matt Bracken claiming that the government has sent a notice out that they will be suspending the SNAP program on November 1st until further notice.
“States across the country are being told to stop the supplemental nutrition assistance program for the month of November, pending further notice. That’s according to a letter from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Fox 13 obtained a copy from the Crossroads Urban Center in downtown Salt Lake City. Crossroads says if Utah families don’t get food stamps, they’ll turn to the local food pantries, which are already strapped due to the government shutdown. Homeless people Fox 13 talked to, some who use SNAP, say losing food stamps would mean going hungry.” Fox 13, Salt Lake City, October 14.
You can rest assured that the government is fully aware of the repercussions of such a move.
What were once major metropolitan population centers will become smoking ash heaps after the rioting stops.
It seems someone is trying to play Hardball Politics.
It is also readily apparent that whoever it is has absolutely no idea of what they are doing.
I would not put this past the current regime though and take this as a credible threat.
If you live anywhere near a potential flash point I would be seriously looking into having some fire extinguishers and self defense items handy because if they cut off the food to 50 million people in this country it will be a scorched earth scenario shortly afterwards.
There WILL be "Mothafuckin' RIOTS".
11 comments:
Keep your powder dry!
I guess nobody ever read Les Miserables, let alone seen the [redacted] movie.
I might be willing to make some food donations to some in need if such happens but they had best not come to my house looking to threaten us with harm and to steal. If that becomes the case, that the NIC (nincompoop-in-charge - lest you think I meant anything else) defaults on America, then all I can say is: "Let 'er rip"! Any Yom-v bastards come my way trying to attack me and mine to steal our food and I will defend my family to the max under the law.
If the U.S. defaults on its financial responsibilities, being that I am on a federal pension, I may wind up being one of the folks seeking food. Yet, I think we have enough for a few months right now; I hope so. Mind you, I am not against a total shutdown of the government and our economy for awhile, it might get some politicians' heads spinning so hard that they pop out of the assholes into which they are firmly inserted right now
I don't know why you would blame the Obama administration when it's illegal for the administration to spend money (whether on SNAP or anything else) without Congressional approval, and the House could in fact actually impeach him if he did so (and they apparently do want him to violate the law by spending money he's not authorized to spend so that they can impeach him). Congress could clear this up right now by approving a budget authorizing the Obama administration to spend money on SNAP, or at least a continuing resolution authorizing the President to do so. Congress and John Boehner and Eric Cantor in particular, not Barack Obama, hold the purse keys here, and they seem to be holding them close.
Nonsense. The House has passed multiple bills giving options to fund parts or even all of Government with the exception of Obamacare. Reid has refused to take any of those bills to the Senate, and Obama has promised to veto anything reaching him that doesn't fund Obamacare. This mess is entirely of the Democrats' making.
I'm sorry, but the Constitution doesn't allow one house of Congress to impose their will on the other house of Congress and upon the President at gunpoint. It doesn't. It just doesn't. Read it yourself and find one place -- ONE place -- where it allows the House of Representatives to tell the Senate and the President, "repeal a law I don't like, like Social Security, Medicare, or Obamacare, or I shut down the government." It has no such mechanism in it. It calls for ELECTIONS and VOTES if you want to repeal a law. That's the procedure laid out in the Constitution. If you want to repeal a law, sir, elect yourself a President and a Senate that will repeal it, do not act like a terrorist and throw a temper tantrum and shut down the entire government because you lost an election. That's called being a sore loser. At best. At worst...
The fact of the matter is that the House is behaving like terrorists. The Republicans in the House do not represent the majority of Americans -- the House Republicans actually got fewer votes than the House Democrats last year, they have a majority of seats only because of gerymandering -- and are attempting to get via the terrorist act of shutting down the government what they could not get at the ballot box. Well sir I believe in democracy and in the system set up by the Constitution, which requires two houses of Congress and the President to consent. We have a word for a system where a minority rules over the majority, sir, and it is called TYRANNY and I want no truck of it, nor of the apologists for tyranny who insist upon compromise with tyranny. The founders of our nation refused to compromise with Tyranny, and I fully support my President and my Senate when they refuse to compromise with Tyranny too. If the House wants to repeal Obamacare, they can do it by the mechanism provided in the Constitution, sir -- by getting the majority of the votes in the Senate and Presidential elections. NO COMPROMISE WITH TYRANTS.
Enough said.
It's not about repeal, it's about funding. The House decides what gets funded and what doesn't (Section 7, clause 1). What the House is doing is entirely legitimate and it is entirely able to pass bills to fund parts of Government only. The tyrants are Reid and Obama who absolutely will not compromise on funding for one central plank of their agenda.
I side with you Tux, even tho I'm adamentely against Obama Care. It is still the law and a few Rethuglicans are holding the whole economy as hostage. This is wrong.
No. It is not about funding. Read your Constitution some more. Taxation bills must originate in the House (the section you are reading), but the tax bills to fund Obamacare have already been passed and are law. Obamacare is self-funding and does not need more funding from the House, the House is trying to repeal funding that has already been passed, something which the House cannot do under the Constitution without the consent of the Senate and the President, consent which they do not have. In other words, they are trying to bypass the Constitution to get at gunpoint what they did not get at the ballot box. Furthermore, the Constitution says that budgets that do not increase taxation can originate in either house and must have the vote of both houses of Congress plus the President (unless there is a veto override supermajority). The Senate passed a budget. The House passed a budget. Procedure calls for the budget to be discussed in a conference committee and a final budget arrived at. The House Republican leadership is refusing to appoint members to that conference committee. Instead a minority of the representatives in the House that represent a minority of the U.S. population are throwing a temper tantrum and shutting down the government because they lost the last election.
Well elections have consequences, sir. It's called DEMOCRACY. And it's not only a good idea, it's the law set forth by the Constitution, a Constitution that the House is trying to sidestep with "you repeal a law we don't like, or we kill the government." NO NEGOTIATION WITH TERRORISTS. Period. When they sign a continuing resolution and re-open the government, THEN there is time for negotiation. Until they do so, they are terrorists acting outside of the Constitutional procedures in an attempt to get at gunpoint what they could not get at the ballot box,. and I have no -- ZERO -- sympathy for traitors who spit on the Constitution I swore an oath to uphold. SIR.
Constitutional arguments aside, it has already started in North Carolina.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/16/us-usa-fiscal-northcarolina-idUSBRE99F00Y20131016
Bob
III
Post a Comment