Recently, thanks to Michael Medved, I learned that the federal government spends well over eight billion dollars a year supplying over 30 million school children with “free” lunches and another two-and-a-half billion on “free” breakfasts. And what I, as a concerned citizen, would like to know is why they’re forcing the parents to be responsible for putting dinner on the table. Okay, I admit I’m joshing. But how long will it be before the leftists demand to know why the feds are shucking their obvious responsibility just because the sun has gone down? And just how long before FDR’s heirs in Washington launch their own version of the New Deal called Three Square Meals?
What I’d really like to know is: why haven’t public services removed those millions of kids from their homes? I mean, if parents can’t afford to give their children a couple of eggs or a banana and a bowl of cereal in the morning or an apple and a peanut butter-and-jelly sandwich for lunch, what other essentials can’t they afford to provide for their kids? A bed? A blanket? Shoes? A tooth brush? A semi-automatic?
The truth is, if I were running for president as a Democrat, I wouldn’t be a piker like Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. Why stop with universal health care? I’d promise universal car, fire and life insurance. I’d promise four weeks paid vacation for every workingman and workingwoman in America, and eight weeks for every non-working man and woman. Why not? They have more time to kill and even greater incentive to get out to the polls on election day. On top of all that, I’d promise to give any person who voted for me $5,000, a lifetime supply of Viagra and free lottery tickets, besides.
Hey, I’m a Democrat! I can afford to be generous. It’s not my money, after all. It’s yours.