What?

Socially Liberal | Fiscally Conservative | Biomedical Engineer | i'm using radical in an 80s context guys

[depsidase]

[radicalpolitics]

[donniehaspronouns]

I fully believe that conservatives do not want their tax dollars going to fund school lunches for children because they see children not as individual people but rather as extensions of their parents, and they view a child’s hunger as a moral failing of the parent to maintain their property rather than a hungry child being a vulnerable individual that deserves to be fed.

[itsthebrokenheartthatdecides]

in reality they don't trust that's where the money is actually going like every other funding that hasn't gone to what it's claimed to be earmarked for, and prefer charity which is accounted for and by definition voluntary.

but sure, keep showing you have no freaking clue what the political position of your opposition is.

[beardedmrbean]

2 men arrested for allegedly trafficking nearly $7 million worth of SNAP benefits: Officials

Antonio Bonheur, 74, of Mattapan, and Saul Alisme, 21, of Hyde Park, were arrested Wednesday morning and charged with one count of food stam

Two Massachusetts men trafficked nearly $7 million worth of benefits intended for people who cannot afford food, federal prosecutors in Boston said Wednesday.

Feb. 7, 2025 — Four additional defendants have pleaded guilty for their roles in the $250 million fraud scheme that exploited a federally fu

MINNEAPOLIS — Four additional defendants have pleaded guilty for their roles in the $250 million fraud scheme that exploited a federally funded child nutrition program during the COVID-19 pandemic, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Lisa D. Kirkpatrick.

Feds Reach Milestone in Feeding Our Future Prosecutions With More Than 50 Convictions

3 more people have entered guilty pleas in the massive Minnesota fraud case.

US Families Are Losing Money Over School Lunch Payments: How A Simple $2.50 Fee Turns Into A Staggering $100M Scam

Parents are swindled in a school lunch scam as they barely notice the processing fees when using the pre-paid system to cover their children

According to a new report from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), parents are being defrauded in a "$100 million school lunch scam," losing money each time they pay for their children's meals. The report reveals that many parents are unaware of the processing fees, typically around $2.50, that accumulate over time when using the prepaid system for school lunches.

To be clear, this is the companies that process the payments that are charging this fee not the school or the government.

Chicago schools audit reports widespread fraud with free lunch program

(The Center Square) – The Chicago Public School District is faced with “persistent and widespread fraud” by highly-paid employees taking adv

The Chicago Public School District is faced with “persistent and widespread fraud” by highly-paid employees taking advantage of food stamp and state-subsidized health care benefits by underreporting their income, according to a 2022 annual report from the district’s Office of Inspector General. The report provides multiple instances where CPS staff fraudulently underreported their income and received SNAP benefits while making their children eligible for free-and-reduced lunches at their schools. The examples cited in the report occurred from 2016 through 2020. The school district stated that it has participated in a federal program for more than a decade that provides free lunches to all enrolled students, regardless of their family's income.

_________________________

Not a conservative, technically I'm a liberal, but I don't like fraud at massive scale like this.

I'm all for school breakfast and lunches for all the kids that want it, I'm fine with it being taxpayer funded, provided there's enough accountability and the money stays in the country with all the food sourced here preferably as local to the schools as possible and the places making it are all locally owned and operated as well.

I call that a double win, support local farms and businesses and fill kids tummies up at the same time.

I want accountability for the billions of dollars in food aid that have been stolen from those kids lunch boxes over the last forever, and punishments harsh enough that nobody tries it again.

I also don't want whatever that garbage that was showing up in the michelle obama lunch mess that looked worse than prison food.

[cookingwithroxy]

The reality is that an element of food insecurity in schools is directly related to fraud, bribes and mismanagement. There's no wiggle room for hungry kids because what slack there had been got eaten up by administrators who see being part of the school board as a lovely way to line their pockets.

And if they are caught, they can just swap districts and repeat their bullshit.

THIS IS A THING.

[gunsul]

Speaking as a conservative, I don’t want a single penny going to ANY government program, regardless of who benefits from it. The sad fact is that the bureaucrats who administer all these programs do so at a huge cost to those beneficiaries even if unintentional. Taking school lunches as an example, spend a billion taxpayer dollars on it. It goes through the bureaucracy where a big chunk of that billion stops. Then they see what’s left and have to cut costs somehow to still look like it is effective. The result is cheap, barely nutritious food to some but not all kids who need it, from the lowest bidder who will now send his kids to college on the windfall from uncle sugar.

Now take half that amount and give it to a charity. They have to justify every dollar spent and track where it went. They are gonna get the best for the least to stretch it out legitimately and mix it with other donations to benefit the recipients and if they can’t produce a money trail with a minimum percentage being used for its intended purpose (some the the government NEVER faced until DOGE), they lose their tax exempt status.

Which one do you think will return a better result test over year?

This is why conservatives want LIMITED government.

[radicalpolitics]

Crazy how that list of links didnt even include the recently uncovered $20 million fraud in New Jersey's Montclair school district.

[chutzpahchesed]

x

[brosef-von-dudehomie]

Ok that was enraging

[writterings]

it's really funny teaching rhetoric to college freshmen because i explained ad hominem to them via example by arguing with a student over something silly (i kept insisting 25 minutes was a quarter of an hour, not 15) and then "insulted" her instead of addressing her argument (i said she doesn't have a college degree whereas i have two, so of course she'd be wrong - which the whole point is that it's a stupid insult but not something that's actually mean) but she got soooooo mad so even when i stopped the exercise and explained that she was indeed correct (15 minutes is a quarter of an hour). like she was still fuming. so i validated her feelings on that, complimented her, and even reminded the class that a college degree doesn't mean that a person is smart/right. and then i went on to explain that, yeah, dirty arguing techniques like that are meant to make you so unreasonably angry that you can't respond or that you lose your cool, so your opponent looks like they win by default. the student i was arguing with then just said that it seemed like professional ragebaiting and i was like. well yeah that's correct.

and then this kid, this one kid who is always very eager to answer questions and is always kind to his classmates, raised his hand looking a little bothered. now for context, i emphasize thinking for yourself in my classroom, even if that means disagreeing with something i say and he has echoed some stuff that his parents clearly have told him before. he's not a bad kid or an asshole, he's just an 18 year old with conservative parents who otherwise knows nothing about politics. but he just looks so bothered after i explain this about dirty arguing techniques. big frown on his face. looking unsure. when i nod at him to speak, he says, in a very quiet voice, "didn't -- didn't charlie kirk used to do that?"

and i was like. well yes. yes he was famous for stuff like this.

and then the kid looked down and was just like, "oh. i thought he was just really good at debating. i never watched his videos though, only clips. why would he do that?"

and that coincidentally lined up perfectly with the rest of the lesson, which was on propaganda

[dancinbutterfly]

this? is why conservatives hate liberal arts education

[mg-dl]

This is true. I was the classroom and everyone clapped afterward too.

[itsthebrokenheartthatdecides]

no Charlie Kirk did not use dirty debating techniques, often what he did was say something along the lines of "let's play this out" and walked through their arguments and picked them apart as needed. he never used ad hominem, he just let them talk and responded in a way that he hoped made them think about their positions and why they held them.

you just didn't like that.

[ukyokuonji]

It's really telling that no one on the yt ass app has talked about how ICE has just been given more power to abuse the latine and immigrant community. I know it's all been "charlie kirk this, charlie kirk that" but that doesn't detract from that fact that on Monday, September 8th the supreme court ruled that ice can detain based solely on having brown skin or "looking latine," speaking Spanish or speaking English with an accent, being present at locations that have migrant workers, or the type of work they have.

When this news broke my dad told me and my siblings, all of us who are US Citizens, born and raised in the US, that we have to carry some form of official documentation on us, especially because we live in a city that has been heavily targeted by the Trump administration for being a sanctuary city. My grandmother was staying with us and even though she is my non-latine grandmother, and she's a US citizen, my dad and aunt made the decision to have my dad drive her back home to New Jersey because she has an accent and her documents are back home.

As someone who is latine and south asian, I need you to know that this will not just affect latine people! My non-latine cousin was pulled over by ice about two weeks ago just for being brown! However this will disproportionately affect latine people. Just today ICE was seen on the street by my home and my work! One of my duties at work is to make sure that ICE does not come into our elementary school because we're a predominantly latine school. I HAVE TO MAKE SURE ICE DOES NOT KIDNAP 5 YEAR OLDS. That is the reality of the situation.

I want it to be known that I have been scared before because I'm living as a person of color in the United States. I have been scared before because of being a south asian born post 9/11. I have been scared before being a latina growing up during the Dreamer movement, despite being a citizen. However, before this week I have never been scared enough to feel the need to carry documentation proving I am a citizen of the damn country I was born in! Now I feel that scared though. Especially because a few months ago, for the first time in my life, someone assumed I didn't speak English. Another person of color assumed I didn't speak English and shit talked me in the CVS aisle because they assumed I didn't speak English. And then a week ago I also got mistaken for not speaking English when I went to the doctor's office and chatted with the receptionist in Spanish and then was handed Spanish paperwork to fill out.

Anyways, the point is the fact that I have seen maybe two? three? posts about this on here is upsetting and immensely telling. Speak up. Talk about the fact that this is happening because it will not stop with targeting latines. It will become worse. It already is because the government is going to punish immigrants for "making light of" charlie kirk's death. Not for celebrating, or joking, for making light of.

This silence is astounding. It's not surprising, but it is just astounding to see how little y'all truly care about brown people and immigrants.

[radicalpolitics]

ICE cannot detain you solely for having brown skin, or how you speak, or your job, etc, etc. ICE can only detain you based on a combination of all of those factors in totality. It is called a criminal profile and it is what all law enforcement uses when they are searching for a suspect. Sometimes criminal profiles include race but they are never based solely on 1 factor and that is the entire point of what the supreme court said in their ruling.

[animentality]

[benjaminfranklincat]

And the shooter has been charged and will go to prison, no different than if he had killed the kid with a knife, car or bare hands. What's your point?

[pixieliciousnippletassles]

Yeah I'll bite.

Because it's unlikely that the shooter 100% intended to shoot an 11 year old knowingly because they were a victim of ding dong ditch.

Because it's faster and easier to kill someone with a gun that any other weapon, deliberately or not.

Because guns are the only weapon you can still kill someone with long-range before your brain catches up with the situation.

Because that boy wouldn't be dead in almost any other country you bastard insensitive fuck.

Whilst the shooter is a murderer, they probably would have gone 'woah nellie' and stopped before murdering a child by stabbing or strangulation or poison or dynamite. You prick. What a waste of 2 lives and you're 'what's the difference'-ing?

[radicalpolitics]

This would be a good counter argument if it weren't for the fact that the kids already rang his doorbell twice in the last 15 minutes. The third time they rang the bell, the shooter was hiding behind his fence in his side yard waiting for them. He saw the kids running away, chased after them, and then shot at the kids. He knew what he was shooting at and he still chose to shoot. The police found him later in a hotel. The piece of shit didnt even turn himself in after he realized what he did.

I fully believe if he didnt have a gun he still would have chased them down. Either with a knife, bare hands, his car, a bat. Who knows. Seems like there was another recent 'ding ding ditch' killing where a man crashed his car into another car with teens inside, killing 3 of them.

People are out here killing kids and you're blaming the weapon that's used instead of the man who couldn't contain his rage over someone knocking on his door? We see over and over again when guns or knives are taken away and regulated nothing changes. Violent crime in Australia didnt go down after the gun ban and violent crime in the UK is not going down by restricting knives.

You cant prevent violence by just taking weapons away. You can prevent *gun* violence by taking guns away, but then other forms of violent crime will go up to compensate for the missing weapon choice. If someone wants to hurt you they will do their best. Whether its with a purpose built weapon or with an improvised lamp that looks heavy enough for the job.

[onthedriftinthetardis]

If you vote in North Carolina, you're going to see this on your ballot. Looks pretty straightforward, right?

But it's a trap placed by the GOP. ⬇️⬇️⬇️

Voting "For" this referendum will remove the phrase "and every person who has been naturalized" from this section on voter eligibility in the NC constitution. This could place the future voting rights of about 400,000 naturalized US citizens in the state in jeopardy.

Just a reminder - it's already illegal for non-citizens to vote! There's no evidence that this happens in significant numbers anywhere in the country, and North Carolina has restrictions in place against it happening at all, like the voter ID law that's now in effect.

(The voter ID law disproportionately affects POC, as well as transgender voters, both of whom are more likely to vote Democratic as well as lack the needed ID, but that's another post.)

Voting "Against" on this measure will leave the state constitution unchanged.

Here's the whole bill (PDF): https://dashboard.ncleg.gov/api/Services/BillSummary/2023/H1074-SMBK-89(sl)-v-2

[heymerle]

I was reading a story this morning about this. Georgia did a through check of their voting rolls. They found 20 non-citizens on them, none of whom had voted in recent elections. Georgia has 8.2 MILLION voters.

Naturalized citizens are CITIZENS and can legally vote.

Non-citizens voting is not a problem. Anywhere in the US.

[radicalpolitics]

Voting for this referendum will remove the phrase:

"Every person born in the United States and every person who has been naturalized, 18 years of age, and possessing the qualifications set out in this Article, shall be entitled to vote at any election by the people of the State, except as herein otherwise provided."

and will replace it with:

"Only a citizen of the United States who is 18 years of age and possessing the qualifications set out in this Article, shall be entitled to vote at any election by the people of the State, except as herein otherwise provided." (Source)

This is not a trap. They're doing exactly what they said they're doing, which is clarifying the language. The updated language includes naturalized citizens. Nobodys voting rights are at stake. The bill OP linked clarifies further that naturalized citizens are included in the definition of US citizen.

[sawbuckplus]

[disgruntled-foreign-patriarch]

hmmm

[radicalpolitics]

Of course the surface area is higher now than 2012 when you cherry pick the lowest extreme. You cant compare the ice caps year to year like that. There's a reason NASA measures the rate of decline as percent per decade and not per year. The surface area year to year is highly variable.

[mtndewloyalist-xix]

“Packing the courts” is one of the funnier accusations to level against a candidate because unless that candidate is outright euthanizing people upon taking office, filling vacant judicial spots is just a normal part of a president’s job

[mtndewloyalist-xix]

Dems got mad at obama for NOT cramming in a shitlib replacement for scalia before trump could be sworn in

[freebroccoli]

It's also funny because prior to 2020, everyone knew that "packing the courts" meant adding Supreme Court justices because you don't like the ones in office but can't get rid of them. It would have been extremely easy for Democrats to defeat Republican claims that they want to pack the courts by just committing to not doing it, but they couldn't because they wanted to do it. So instead they just changed the definition to include normal parts of the job and then pretended those two things are equivalent.

[mtndewloyalist-xix]

Packing the courts has always meant “pushing as many fellow ideologues into the courts as possible to protect that official’s future policies”, of course basing such accusations on the philosophy that courts should be nonpartisan and impartial. But the thing is, voters on both sides openly cite preferential representation in the judiciary as a reason for supporting their candidates.

Literally this in action:

[freebroccoli]

Perhaps. I think the only time I'd heard the phrase before 2020 was in reference to adding justices to the Supreme Court (especially FDR), but I may have just missed it.

[radicalpolitics]

No you're right. "Packing the courts" was originally defined as adding seats to the supreme court, but the dems decided to redefine it so they could be mad at Trump for doing his job. Then after Biden took office they threatened to actually add seats to SCOTUS. Thankfully their bills kept failing and it got nowhere.

[ex-foster]

[wellbuchan]

With "I expose the links between foster care and sex trafficking." in your bio you're really weird defending giving birth so we can throw babies into that system. And just because we bring up the fact foster care is brutal to children doesn't mean we aren't doing things to change it. Like, sorry i'm not in a government position to change the entire system instantly.

And even if the foster care system were perfect women still deserve the right to abort.

[radicalpolitics]

Its pretty rare for unwanted newborns to go into foster care. Typically, expecting parents will choose an adoptive family and sign adoption consent forms before the baby is even born.

The only time babies go into the foster system is when the state forcibly takes them away or if you willingly put them there instead of direct adoption. Even then they will get adopted quickly because they are *babies* and everyone wants to adopt a baby. It's older kids that end up stuck in forster care until they're 18, not babies.

[kosmogrl]

[kelsierfortnite]

"You told me it would get worse."

"It will," Wit said, "but then it will get better. Then it will get worse again. Then better. This is life, and I will not lie by saying every day will be sunshine. But there will be sunshine again, and that is a very different thing to say. That is truth. I promise you, Kaladin: You will be warm again.

the stormlight archive by Brandon Sanderson

[snaxle-deactivated20260531]

today was single handedly the best day of my life. i caught a cop stealing from the store i work at

[snaxle-deactivated20260531]

literally watched him slide a candy bar into his sleeve and i literally felt like i was on top of the world. i felt like i could throw a car over my head. he walked around the store for a bit after that looking to see if we have any locally made pickles and then when he couldnt find any he was about to leave and im like ^__^ have a good night, are you going to pay for the candy bar you stole :3? and then i got to watch a grown ass pig shyly walk up to the counter to pay kinda just awkwardly laughing about it and was like "whoops forgot about it haha...." and then left without another word. this opportunity will never happen ever again. being able to tell a cop that he needs to pay for a candy bar he attempted to steal makes me feel incredibly powerful

[petitebear]

When I worked returns in retail, I got to tell a cop that it was a federal offense to return bullets. He said his wife was pissed at him for buying them.

[radicalpolitics]

If you're talking about the US then thats just not true. It's policy at a lot of stores, but it's not illegal.

[man-i-dunno]

As they should

And your friendly reminder that falsifying a service or assistance dog is illegal

Reminder for business:

You may ask two questions to a service dog or miniature horse team:

Is this animal specifically trained or currently training to aid a person's disability?

What tasks or work is the animal trained to perform?

The handler should respond "yes" to the first question and to the second there is a wide variety of valid responses. Some examples: medical alert, behavior disruptions, psychiatric response, allergen or gluten detection, navigation/guide work, mobility aid, and many more.

You may not:

Ask for the person's disability or condition

Ask for the animal to perform tasks

Separate the animal and handler

Ask them to leave or refuse admittance without cause

You do however have a right to ask them to leave if the animal is behaving inappropriately:

The dog is barking uncontrollably (some dogs bark to alert their handlers or to get help for their handler but they are barking in a short, controlled manner, and will stop when asked (barking is also normally directed at the handler, not other people))

The animal is pulling at the end of the leash towards other people/dogs/food (many animals are trained to do forward momentum or navigation so it's okay if they are pulling! but it should not be in a disrupting manner)

The animal has accidents in the store (service animals, even while still in training, should be potty trained before they go into non pet friendly stores or events)

The handler is not being responsible with the animal

The animal is causing damage to merchandise (if an animal accidentally breaks something or gets confused, the handler should pay for the item without argument (mistakes do happen! But the handler will always take full responsibility))

And finally service animals are allowed to make mistakes! They're living beings, they are bound to make mistakes at some point.

But legitimate service animal handlers are always working to prevent these mistakes and will take responsibility for any damage their animal may have done by bumping into things, getting confused, etc.

Additionally service animals (in the US at least) do not need to be labeled. What matters is their behavior, not the words on their vest.

Finally, there is no registration for service animals in the US. Those ID websites are scams (other countries and individually governed communities do sometimes have registries but the US has no official registration under the ADA)

Need more info? ada.gov

[oneheadtoanother]

[howstrangethemusicsoundstome]

It’s true and you should say it.

[ingridverse]

[greater-than-the-sword]

Maybe the Christian “fundamentalists” were right eh?

[radicalpolitics]

No kink at pride - Yes.

Writers writing bad characters is condoning bad behavior - No.

Sex in movies is bad - No.

Certain outfits need my consent to be worn around me - Yes.

Consent isn't some christian puritanical idea. It's actually a pillar of the BDSM community. Hope that helps.

[guhhhhhhhhhhh]

Man.... tumblr really has changed. Someone filmed themself having gay sex on the senate hearing room floor and I haven't seen a single post about it

[guhhhhhhhhhhh]

Congressional Staffer Filmed Porn in Senate Hearing Room: ‘Appears to be Unprotected Sex’

A congressional staffer reportedly filmed a gay porn video in a Senate hearing room, according to footage leaked to the Daily Caller on Frid

[weaselle]

psst. hey

people who are legal adults who want their tubes tied or top surgery etc etc should be able to do so full stop.

"oh but what if they regret it for the rest of their lives"

okay. so what.

Adults make decisions about our lives, that's what being an adult is. We may decide to get a face tattoo, or quit a promising job, or join the army, or move to another country.

That's practically all we do as adults. We make decisions that effect the rest of our life, and then we live, or sometimes die, accordingly. Maybe i'll spend the rest of my life regretting telling my influential boss he doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground, but, as an adult, that's the kind of life decision i am allowed to make for myself. And after all, it might be the best thing i ever did. It's my life, and i get to do all the fucking around and all the finding out i want to.

surgical transition, or sterilization, or whatever... is exactly the same. If you aren't going to let a legally adult person decide for themself about that stuff, then you can't let them get a tattoo or move to Florida either

[heturnedleft]

The right to be wrong is one of the most fundamental rights there is. If people try to take away your liberty whenever they think you'll regret your decisions, your liberty doesn't mean much.