“Pro-life” Cline votes NO on keeping kids fed

One day before declaring that #LifeWins following the Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade, Congressman Cline was one of just 42 members of the House (all Republicans) to vote NO on the Keep Kids Fed Act.

As NBC News reports, the legislation extends “some food assistance measures for children that anti-hunger advocates have called critical as more parents struggle with the rising costs of inflation, less than a week before the measures were set to end.”

The pandemic-era child nutrition waivers have helped millions of kids get access to meals both in school and during the summer for the last two years and were scheduled to expire June 30.

The bipartisan legislation now heads to the president’s desk for his signature. It would extend some of the dozens of child nutrition waivers that Congress gave the Agriculture Department the authority to issue at the start of the pandemic.

…..

The Keep Kids Fed Act would enable summer meal program providers to operate with more flexibility and help schools in the coming academic year as they continue to cope with supply chain interruptions and labor shortages.

So once again, Cline’s professed concern for “life” ends with the birth of actual children whose families depend of federal nutrition assistance to keep them fed and, um, alive.

Cline’s split reaction to overturning of Roe

There’s an interesting contrast between the way Congressman Cline reacted to the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade on his Congressional Facebook page and his campaign Facebook page.

Here is the former:

And here is the latter:

So on his Congressional Facebook page, Cline frames abortion as strictly a matter for states to decide, with no reference to the moral issue. He doesn’t seem to be celebrating.

On his campaign Facebook page, clearly aimed at what he perceives as his base, he’s in a celebratory mood.

Is he nervous about a backlash among the majority of voters who support at least some abortion rights? Perhaps he has reason to be– even in the Republican-leaning Sixth District.

Cline is silent on January 6 hearing

Yes, physical threats against Supreme Court justices are abhorrent. And those who make them deserve to be arrested and prosecuted.

You can believe this and also appreciate the work of the House January 6 Committee to investigate and report on the attempt by former President Trump (“our great president”) to subvert the results of the 2020 election, and on those who aided and abetted that effort– violently or otherwise.

Unless you are Congressman Ben Cline, who posted on Facebook today about the former and has yet to acknowledge the Committee’s powerful opening hearing on Thursday.

I hope Cline has the decency to feel the sting of his brave Republican colleague Liz Cheney’s words.

Where does Cline draw the line on guns?

My letter to the editor in the June 8 edition of The News-Gazette, which circulates in Rockbridge County, Lexington and Buena Vista:

I’m not currently a gun owner. But I know that many good people of many political persuasions own guns, and I have no problem with responsible owners having firearms for hunting, recreation and protection.

Which brings us to our Sixth District Congressman Ben Cline.

In an interview on WRVA radio the day after the Uvalde massacre, he repeated the worn-out talking points that Congressional Republicans use to avoid enacting serious gun violence prevention measures.

Cline proposed posting retired police officers at schools. A retired police officer fired at the racist mass murderer at the supermarket in Buffalo on May 14, but the murderer was wearing body armor and the retired officer was among those killed.

He said, “Let’s talk about mental health counseling.” But as far as I can tell, Cline has never done anything in Congress to provide resources to woefully-underfunded mental health services.

And other countries have mental health problems too. But ours is the only country where horrors like those in Buffalo and Uvalde happen on such a regular basis.

Cline talks endlessly about protecting “Second Amendment rights.” But as the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said, the Second Amendment “is not unlimited. [It is] not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

Does Cline believe this? His position on “gun rights” is so extreme (more extreme than most gun owners) that when he was in the House of Delegates, he bragged about his endorsement by the Virginia Citizens Defense League— which believes the National Rifle Association is too soft.

He actually opposed issuing a new Virginia license plate with the message: “Stop Gun Violence.”

Cline shouldn’t be allowed to go unchallenged. He needs to be asked specifically why he opposes universal background checks for gun purchases. (Does he support any background checks at all?) Why is he against red flag laws to temporarily remove firearms from people who are a clear threat to themselves or others? Why does he oppose limits on high-capacity magazines? Does he support any restrictions on private arms ownership at all? How about fully automatic weapons? Grenade launchers?

Where does he draw the line? Does he draw it anywhere?

And after Buffalo, Uvalde, Tulsa, etc., etc., this is all that Cline can say: