I'm going to embed a video clip below. It shows Gina Plata-Nino, the Director of SNAP Policy and Advocacy at the Food Research and Action Center, being questioned by Rep. Brandon Gill. The topic of discussion is efforts to remove unhealthy food choices - in this particular case, sodas - from the list of items eligible to be bought using funds from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.
Ms. Plata-Nino is clearly left-wing and populist in her approach, defending peoples' right to use SNAP benefits in any way they please. Notice how she avoids, evades and dodges any attempt to get her to admit that sugary sodas are in no way nutritional, and aren't really "food" as the SNAP program was originally intended to fund. She literally can't be persuaded to acknowledge facts. Instead, all she can do is repeat her pre-programmed talking points.
It's a bit like medical administrators and professionals who absolutely cannot admit that only biological women can become pregnant and give birth. They daren't acknowledge that fact, because in doing so they would be forced to acknowledge that "trans" women are not, in fact, women at all - merely cosmetically adapted males.
Here's the video. It's only about five minutes long, but I think it's worth watching.
That's what we're facing in every election in this country. Districts dominated by people who use government benefits will listen to advocates and politicians like Ms. Plata-Nino, and vote in lockstep with those who promise them more benefits without cost to themselves. Districts dominated by people whose taxes have to fund those benefits will be (legitimately) angry at how they're wasted, exploited and abused by the recipients.
Sadly, more and more districts are dominated by those who want something for nothing, and vote accordingly. Many of those votes are, of course, illegitimate, as the widespread investigations into voter fraud and electoral register mismanagement are demonstrating. Will that be enough to put things right? Your guess is as good as mine . . .
Peter
1 comment:
It's probably worse than it looks. Maybe we should go check to see if beverage manufacturers have been donating to her through some back door. You're looking at corruption disguised as ideology.
Post a Comment