A reader writes:
After hearing Newt’s lack of an explanation to David Gregory about why Obama is the "food stamp president", I built a chart from Food Stamp participation data from the US Agricultural and the US Population and compared in to the unemployment rate. The chart reflects that there is a latent effect in food stamp usage increases after the unemployment rate increases. It also shows that the percentage of people on food stamps is at an all-time high. One of the reasons is that we have seen an increase of the unemployment rate by 104% in the three years starting since 2007. Interestingly enough, the food stamp population percentage increased only 50%.
Gingrich does not take into account that the unemployment increase is unprecedented since the Great Depression. And I hasten to add, that he lacks the Catholic social justice values that we should help those in need during difficult times.
Another writes:
I was less galled by Newt's saying of the thing as I was by David Gregory's complete failure to challenge the idea of it, when the very conversation that allowed Gingrich to parade his latent racism was talk of high unemployment rates.
"Food stamps" as a Conservative dog-whistle almost makes sense to me in a thriving, Clintonesque economy where jobs are plentiful and the few leeches surface to suckle from our shared prosperity. But David Gregory sat there and allowed Newt Gingrich to demonize government FOOD assistance in an economy in which almost 1 in 10 Americans is out of work. What sort of country do we live in where a candidate for President of the United States can rally citizens to his banner with cries of "LESS FOOD FOR THE HUNGRY!", even IF that cry is coupled with "MORE JOBS FOR THE JOBLESS!"?
The Dish 