Me So Hungry Me Could Eat A Muppet

I like the Muppets. Sesame Street, not so much. Something about Sesame Street always struck me as preachy and off-kilter. Why is there a monster living in a garbage can? What’s with evil Bert anyway? And why does the show spout liberal nonsense? Well, they’re at it again.

For those who don’t know, Sesame Street is a bastion of political correctness. It was created with the idea of brainwashing. . . er, “educating” poor kids. The stated goal was to teach these kids self-esteem and “feelings of competency,” as compared to actual competency. It pushed diversity and “nonagressive ways of resolving conflicts.” It pandered to Hispanic groups in the 1970s, feminists in the 1980s, environmentalists in the 1990s, Bush hate in the 2000s and gay groups in the 10s. And the show has been awash in controveries:

● In 1969, Grover took lessons in civil disobedience from a hippe. . . Bill Ayers.

● Bert and Ernie’s “ambiguous sexuality” has been an issue for years. . . with ambiguous being a code word for “clearly gay.”

● Kami the muppet caught AIDS in 2002. . . from a toilet seat.

● Big Bird told us what happened in the afterlife in 1983. . . you get 72 virgins.

● Mahboub the muppet, an Arab muppet, was inserted into the Israeli version to “bridge the cultural gap” in 2006. . . he's moderate, he only advocates enslaving Israel, not eradicating it.

● The claim in 2004 that Sesame Street triggers attention deficit diso

● Continuous liberal bias, like when it mocked Fox News in 2009 with Oscar the Grouch calling “Pox News” a “trashy news show”... unlike MSNBC which is just trash.

Now PBS/Sesame Street has discovered a new liberal mission. . . phantom hunger.

That’s right, Sesame Street is introducing “Lily, whose family has an ongoing struggle with hunger” because Sesame Street wants to “teach” your kids that America is a land of starving poor people. Why? Because liberalism has come crashing down in flames and they need to rebuild an army of idiots who are ready to do their bidding. What better way than to tell kids that other kids are starving because evil rich people steal the very food from their mouths. Kids are suckers for “I’m trying to stop hunger,” but not “I’m trying to protect a racial spoils system” or “I’m trying to protect the union’s ability to keep child molesters in the classroom.”

Here’s what they’re basing this garbage on: according to the corrupt Dept. of Agriculture, 17 million kids are starving in the United States. Where does that number come from? It’s estimated based on the number of people who are counted as “living below the poverty line.” In other words, it’s theoretical. In other words, it’s a fraud.

For one thing, they keep raising the dollar threshold for poverty. You can actually be quite well off and still be considered poor. Indeed, study after study has shown that “poor” people in America own cars, appliances and spend their money on cable television and cell phones. Also, this is only an income test, not an asset test. So people living on social security, lotto winners, students, small business owners who earn their income sporadically or who find a lot of great deductions, people who earn their money overseas, and rich people living on tax-free investments. . . are all considered "poor."

I dare the liberal establishment to find me anyone who is legitimately hungry.

And if they can find such a person, then I want to know why this person can’t get on food stamps like the other 43 million Americans who have found their way onto the program and into my wallet? Also, did you know that you can earn up to $39,220 and still qualify for free or discounted school lunches? How can anyone not feed themselves on $39k?

Hunger also ain’t what it used to be. Even aside from being a completely made up statistic, they’ve redefined hunger as “food insecure,” which means at some point during the year your food intake was reduced and your normal eating pattern was disrupted because you lacked money for food. So now you can be hungry if you spent your money on booze or you forgot your wallet or Obama taxed the crap out of your paycheck.

This is all theoretical wishful thinking by liberals which bares no relationship to what is going on in reality. It is shameful propaganda aimed at making liberals feel like they have a reason to exist. But in the spirit of things, let me offer this first line of dialog:

Lily: Why am I so hungry?

Lily's Dad: Because liberals made us dependent on the government and then spent all the money on Obama's friends. Obama is why you're hungry.