The GOP voted to reduce food stamps, yet many of the recipients of that benefit have jobs that Republicans say should pay less by getting rid of the minimum wage (“House cuts $40B over 10 years to food stamps,” Sept. 20). Some Republicans insist that the uninsured not purchase health insurance through the Affordable Care Act.
Defining humanity doesn’t seem to be a Republican strong point, at least in practice. I’m sure that somewhere in the recesses of their minds, they feel their reduction in food stamps is justified.
Class warfare, to them, can only be attributed to Democrats who want to raise taxes on billionaires. Maybe this is the Republican version of the war on poverty.
Lawmakers worsen disparity
Our lawmakers in Congress continue to help the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Their vote to cut the food stamp program is a national disgrace.
Lawmakers should be made to feed themselves on $23 a week. They argue there has been growth in the job market, but much of it has been in the service sector, which has a much lower pay rate than that of our lawmakers. The highest income increases have gone to those in the top wage-earning bracket.
Next time you get a fast-food burger, ask the people at the window or counter what their pay is. Some of those workers are not high schoolers earning pocket money; they are the main breadwinners for their families.
If anything, the food stamp program should be expanded. May God bless all of these workers, and let us strive to lift up those who are most in need, not punish them because of their circumstances.
Obama doing right in Syria case
The writer of the Sept. 12 Readers’ Forum letter “President Obama is not a leader” wrongly chastised Mr. Obama for asking Congress for permission before embarking on a military strike on Syria.
The writer asked what would have happened if President Harry Truman and Gen. Dwight Eisenhower had stopped to ask for permission before bombing Hiroshima or storming the beaches of Normandy. Both operations had the consent of Congress, because President Franklin Roosevelt had asked for and received a declaration of war. He followed the Constitution.
I would much rather have a president who looks for peaceful ways to resolve critical world issues than a rogue cowboy wannabe who shoots first and verifies later.
Who will be next to blame for Syria?
President Obama set the red line on chemical weapons use in Syria. Then he said it was set by the international community. Then Congress was responsible. At first the situation was urgent, then not so much.
S. Amjad Hussain, in his Sept. 16 Blade op-ed column, “Now is not the time for another unnecessary war,” blames the neoconservative cabal and suggests it pressed for war.
The President talked about not getting style points for his Syrian approach. Who will be blamed next?
Guidelines: Please keep your comments smart and civil. Don't attack other readers personally, and keep your language decent. Comments that violate these standards, or our privacy statement or visitor's agreement, are subject to being removed and commenters are subject to being banned. To post comments, you must be a registered user on toledoblade.com. To find out more, please visit the FAQ.