About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Continuing his pattern of disparaging remarks about low-income Americans, Cunningham criticized "fat poor people"

December 05, 2008 2:38 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: Resuming his attacks on the poor, Bill Cunningham stated that "[w]e're about the only country in the world with fat poor people" and that "the poor community, so to speak ... have cell phones, they have pagers, they have telephones, they have cars, they have HDTV, and they have those things because they spend no money on food, because it's all given to them for nothing." He added: "Why would a grocery store open in the poor community when everyone gets fed free and they eat too much?"

32 Comments

Radio host Bill Cunningham resumed his attacks on the poor during the December 4 broadcast of his Cincinnati-based show. After declaring that "[w]e're about the only country in the world with fat poor people," Cunningham stated that "the poor community, so to speak ... have cell phones, they have pagers, they have telephones, they have cars, they have HDTV, and they have those things because they spend no money on food, because it's all given to them for nothing." He added: "Why would a grocery store open in the poor community when everyone gets fed free and they eat too much?"

Contrary to Cunningham's suggestion that "poor people" are "fat" simply because "they eat too much," studies have shown a correlation between low-cost foods -- which tend to be less healthy -- and obesity. For instance, a study published in the January 2004 edition of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that "[m]any health disparities in the United States are linked to inequalities in education and income." The report further stated:

First, the highest rates of obesity occur among population groups with the highest poverty rates and the least education. Second, there is an inverse relation between energy density (MJ/kg) and energy cost ($/MJ), such that energy-dense foods composed of refined grains, added sugars, or fats may represent the lowest-cost option to the consumer. Third, the high energy density and palatability of sweets and fats are associated with higher energy intakes, at least in clinical and laboratory studies. Fourth, poverty and food insecurity are associated with lower food expenditures, low fruit and vegetable consumption, and lower-quality diets. A reduction in diet costs in linear programming models leads to high-fat, energy-dense diets that are similar in composition to those consumed by low-income groups. Such diets are more affordable than are prudent diets based on lean meats, fish, fresh vegetables, and fruit. The association between poverty and obesity may be mediated, in part, by the low cost of energy-dense foods and may be reinforced by the high palatability of sugar and fat. This economic framework provides an explanation for the observed links between socioeconomic variables and obesity when taste, dietary energy density, and diet costs are used as intervening variables. More and more Americans are becoming overweight and obese while consuming more added sugars and fats and spending a lower percentage of their disposable income on food.

Similarly, a study (subscription required) published in December 2007 in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association stated:

The finding that energy-dense foods are not only the least expensive, but also most resistant to inflation, may help explain why the highest rates of obesity continue to be observed among groups of limited economic means. The sharp price increase for the low-energy-density foods suggests that economic factors may pose a barrier to the adoption of more healthful diets and so limit the impact of dietary guidance.

As Media Matters for America has documented, Cunningham has previously made disparaging remarks toward low-income Americans on his radio show:

  • On his October 28 broadcast, during a discussion with Jack Malanga, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, Cunningham said: "You know, people are poor in America, Steve, not because they lack money; they're poor because they lack values, morals, and ethics. And if government can't teach and instill that, we're wasting our time simply giving poor people money." Earlier in the show, Cunningham stated that "unlike many countries in the world, Steve, we have fat poor people. We don't have skinny poor people. Ours are fat and flatulent."
  • Cunningham stated on his October 27 broadcast, "Among the so-called noble poor in America ... [b]irth control is not used so illegitimate children can be brought into the world, so the mom can get more checks in the mail from the government." Cunningham then added: "And then once the child is born, that is the key to financial riches in the poor communities -- white and black -- in America. And that key is Section 8 housing and vouchers; the key is food stamps, no work -- if you work you're punished."

From the December 4 broadcast of Clear Channel's The Big Show with Bill Cunningham:

CUNNINGHAM: You know, my -- my grandmother talked about selling apples at 20th and Scott Street in Covington in the 1930s during the Great Depression. Now people are buying Apple computer. So, a Depression was selling apples; now, it's using an Apple computer. You know -- you know, most parts of the world riot when someone throws a bag of rice in the dirt. We riot to get to Wal-Mart.

JOHN TAMNY (editor, RealClearMarkets.com): Yeah, no, again, we must be rich. I don't -- I don't know what everyone's complaining about, but, you know, it's just a very important point to remind people -- but, I mean, think -- Wal-Mart's a good example. Wal-Mart could give all of its profits to its employees who'd go out and spend the money. But then Wal-Mart wouldn't have the money to expand and create new jobs. And so we have to remind people that spending itself is not an economic stimulus necessarily. You need savings so that businesses can grow.

CUNNINGHAM: We're about the only country in the whole world with fat poor people. And we're told every time at Thanksgiving and Christmas how the -- how the pantry shelves are empty because we're handing out free food. I mean, I'm surprised anybody spends money at Kroger. And the poor community, so to speak, when they have cell phones, they have pagers, they have telephones, they have cars, they have HDTV, and they have those things because they spend no money on food, because it's all given to them for nothing. Why would a grocery store open in the poor community when everyone gets fed free and they eat too much?

TAMNY: It's -- it's a great point. And I think the other thing that needs to be -- come from what you just said there is the next time we hear about how there's 40 million uninsured Americans in terms of health, I want you to remind the person who comes on and says that about the cell phones and HDTVs and cars that the poor people have -- I think they can afford insurance, too.

CUNNINGHAM: They could, but they -- they elect not to do it.

TAMNY: They know that we'll pay for them. Yeah, yeah, 'cause they know they can go to the hospital and get free health care regardless, because someone like -- like you is going to pay for it, so there you go.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by mr. l (December 05, 2008 2:47 pm ET)
         

      I've been on the 'free' healthcare before, and let's just say, it sure don't give much...  Couldn't get my teeth cleaned, couldn't get my newborn an MRI, couldn't get the UV lamp for SAD, and, at least with WIC, couldn't get organic foods (NOT allowed, they said!).  Well, irraidated food is better than none, I suppose...

      Report Abuse
      • Author by eweston8542983 (December 05, 2008 2:59 pm ET)
           

        Don't forget "FrankinFood."

        We've been sold and continue to be sold food products that have no history of consumption by humans, with little to no debate.

        Artificial fats being one large example. Its affects on humans still not known in total. Such effects as I know are not pretty, healthy, economiclly profitable to some in the short term though.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by mr. l (December 05, 2008 3:09 pm ET)
             

          Yeah- I've been reading up on Monsanto and their products and policies for 15 years now, and all I can say is 'Good luck, all of us!'

          Report Abuse
    • Author by snoopy (December 05, 2008 2:54 pm ET)
         

      And they wonder why people are leaving the republican party in droves...

      Report Abuse
      • Author by neon desert (December 05, 2008 4:42 pm ET)
           

        I heard it was because the clown sucked, and they couldn't bust the pinata open.

        I also heard that the whole Hannah Montana theme was lame anyway.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by mybrotherskeeper (December 07, 2008 5:54 pm ET)
           

        I don't know if I should mention this, but the states with the highest rates of obesity voted for McCain/Palin. You can look it up. I am not sure what this means, but the states with the highest rates of obesity are reliably Red states. I am guessing this has something to do with high rates of poverty (perhaps rural poverty in particular?) and low levels of educational attainment. And I doubt we are "about the only country" with fat poor people. Peasants were not fat?

        Report Abuse
        • Author by National_Insecurity (December 07, 2008 11:21 pm ET)
             

          UK has same problem. Lack of nutrition in cheap food, plus eating fatty fried foods, sweet foods, and comfort eating. More to it than that, but part of the problem.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by Marker (December 05, 2008 2:57 pm ET)
         
      Wow, another repug handing out advice. When will repugs realize their not part of the equation any longer?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by earnest bledsoe (December 05, 2008 3:03 pm ET)
         

      I'm sure somewhere in Nazi Germany in 1945 someone said, "You know it could be a lot worse.  You're lucky to be here."  Comparisons like this are always ridiculous.  There is always somewhere that's worse off than you are right now, but that doesn't mean things aren't bad here.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (December 05, 2008 3:11 pm ET)
         

      What the hell is this idiopt babbling about?  I work a "good job" and I make a decent salary, and I don't have an HDTV!  Maybe I should quiot my job.  Then the $$$ will just roll in, huh?  What an idiot.  That's the problem these guys get these multi-million $ contracts and they become elitists, forget what it means to actually WORK for a living.  (Forget understanding what it means to be "poor"!) 

      And to cap off their hypocrasy, the critize the Democrats and LIberals who want to raise the MINIMUM wage, and give tax breaks to the MIDDLE CLASS and support a healthy WORK environment as ELITISTS!!!

      No one, anywhere, has a sense of entitlement that rivals that of the rich.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (December 05, 2008 3:19 pm ET)
           

        I've met people who buy into this idea that poor people are living luxurious lifestyles. It's a good conservative ploy to divert attention away from those who make 100x more than the average American, and from what I've seen , it appeals to the envy of very lazy people who secretly dream of doing nothing. 

        Report Abuse
        • Author by DAWUSS (December 05, 2008 3:24 pm ET)
             

          But remember, we're supposed to compare "poor" in America 2008 to "poor" in France 1486 ;)

          Report Abuse
      • Author by DAWUSS (December 05, 2008 3:20 pm ET)
           

        And when you bring that up, you're given the label of "wealth envy"

        Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (December 05, 2008 3:39 pm ET)
             

          LOL. That's OK - I do envy the wealthy!!! Who doesn't want to be wealthy? LOL.

          No, but seriously I know what you mean. 

          I'm just stunned by the idea that Rich liberals are somehow "hypocrits" just because they're successful and want others to be.  Or that economists that support DEMMAND-side economics are somehow elitists, while supply-siders are... what?  Not elitists?  (Funny, they all seems to be investment bankers and CEO's.) Or those damn poor people who think they're entitled to a good days pay for a good days work.  (Or a decent SS check, after a lifetime of paying into the system!)

          The rich apparently think they're money just appeared out of thin air because they worked hard.  BS.  All those overpaid workers at GM and Ford?  Everyone else should be grateful that they were overpaid - it's that much more money that was then spent at YOUR businesses!!!  The rich don't want anyone to have anything, but still expect us to spend our money at their businesses!!! It's insane.

          I'll say it again: No one has a sense of entitlement that rivals that of the rich!

          Report Abuse
    • Author by JLyons (December 05, 2008 3:42 pm ET)
         
      Oh boy what a piece of garbage this Cunningham is. We are sadly the only county that tolerates people like him.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by tippy (December 05, 2008 4:27 pm ET)
           

        Every time I hear of some new offensive rant from this chucklehead I wonder who in the hell listens to his program.  He is nothing but non-stop hatred and bigotry and just plain old geezer grouchiness.  How can he still have advertisers?

        Report Abuse
    • Author by J. Smith (December 05, 2008 4:18 pm ET)
         
      http://www.urban.org/publications/900832.html Poor people really are just lazy! I mean, how dare they work full-time and have 89% of their income come from earned wages!?!? So what that 19 million children live with working parents who are still living in poverty? I mean, those lazy kids chose their lazy parents and they deserve whatver hardship comes their way. Shame on those working parents and their deadbeat kids!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by roundhouse (December 06, 2008 11:15 pm ET)
           

        As far as I'm concerned, if you can't turn a profit and pay a living wage you're a damn poor business person and a shirker of your moral obligation as a community shepherd. It's ridiculous that in our nation of unparalleled wealth that a person can work a full time job and still not have enough money for decent housing, good food and reliable transportation with a little left over at the end of the month. It's sick really. I'm not convinced that employers who are unable to afford to pay living wages to their employees deserve to be in business in the first place. 

        Then along comes Cunningham, who probably gets a good health plan as part of his well paid, "job," acting like the uninsured working poor can stroll into any emergency room and receive long term treatment for the colon cancer they developed from a life-time of consuming cheap, subsidized chemical laden prepared food. Whatever, Bill. What is it something like 70 to 80 percent of all bankruptcies are due to catastrophic illness? 

        Cunningham is inhumane, he is a radical right-wing corporate prostitute. 

        Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (December 05, 2008 5:43 pm ET)
         

      When I hear this argument, I just have to shake my head.  I guess these pussballs think that if you aren't living in a mud hut with flies buzzing around your face, you can't really be considered "poor".

      Of course, when you show them an American who really is living like that, they just shrug their shoulders and say "They're poor because of bad decisions."

      Cunningham just can't stand the thought that a nickel of his tax dollar might go to help somebody who doesn't deserve it.  However, he has no problem if a quarter of his tax dollar is used to bomb somebody who doesn't deserve it.

      Is a puzzlement.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by cpinva (December 05, 2008 6:10 pm ET)
         

      ah, the "calvinist" theology of "pre-destination".  it is already determined if you're going to heaven or hell, nothing you can do to change that.  however,  material success on earth is an indicator that you are one of those pre-destined for heaven,  and those with high moral values tend to be the most materially successful.

      see how neatly it all ties together?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (December 05, 2008 8:10 pm ET)
         

      Damn poor people...don't you just hate them? I just wish somebody would do something about them so we didn't have to come in contact with them...or even look at them.  ;>)

      Report Abuse
    • Author by edaniels31262 (December 06, 2008 12:30 pm ET)
         
      Let's see here, Cunningham is accusing poor people of being fat, poor and lazy (i.e. blacks) having cable, pagers, HDTV and all those nice "American Things" that media advertises. It's the same ole spiel that Reagan used to great politcal effect of the "Welfare Queen" and "Big, Black Buck" in the 1980 Presidental campaign and has led to a cottage industry even after 1995's landmark welfare refrom and statistics challenging Cunningham and his quest points about healthcare and poverty. As an African- American this is the main reason Republicans lost and will continue to lose in major elections because they are still fighting the social and culture wars of the 1960's -early 1990's and Obama exposed their weakness just like Cory Booker did to Sharpe James in Newark of old entrenched Black Leadership who refused to move on to new agendas of need in the African- American community. Cunning ham and conservatives still think they can play those culture war cards when it is not a black/white paradigm anymore but a complex set of economic, social and misplaced agendas led by Republicans who have held power in various forms since 1981. Poverty, gangs, violence, and health effects neighborhoods like "Little Russia" in New York or the Hispanic community and also the crushing poverty of Hmongs and Immirgrant serbian, african and Native Americans on welfare but conservatives can never let go of the Southern Racial strategy of Religion, Race, and Rhetoric. I would ask those conservatives who love defending Cunningham when are you going to come up with a new song because Obama has played you on these issues with great effect. Nobody gets anything for free in this society from the poor to the rich, you will starve in America because there is no safety net unless you are pratcially on your deathbed in the "Free Market".
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jmmartin3402 (December 06, 2008 4:28 pm ET)
         

      Well, of course they're fat!  What do you think they eat every day, grilled salmon and lobster?  Foie gras on crouton toasts?  The silly get!  Some poor people, have to get along with about what Nevada is spending on O.J.: $2.18 a day, each, for their three squares, and more often than not they chow down on whatever the Food Bank has left to hand out. If silly rumps like Cunningham keep spouting off their elitist bull, the hard bottom to the current recession could be a revolution.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by Imichael (December 06, 2008 8:56 pm ET)
         
      I hate to get trivial but this is a funny looking man. This is the same guy that kept using President Obama's middle name after the prince of darkness himself Rove said it was stupid to go with that approach. Really most of these talking conservative heads are extremely funny looking. I think most of them were picked on when they were little. Hell I'm a liberal and good looking.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by cpinva (December 07, 2008 7:21 pm ET)
           

        yeah, i noticed that as well. then there's "slim"  limbaugh, ann  "i'll give you such a jab with my adam's apple!"  coulter and sean "yes, i look like a complete d*ck with this bow tie." hannity, all of whom were probably beat up by the other kids, from pre-school on.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by Rsw58 (December 06, 2008 10:45 pm ET)
         
      Good comment Nerzog! I don't understand why conservatives believe that the poor are living like kings. In conservative la-la land the poor in this country have plasma TV's, drive fancy SUV's and eat steak and lobster every night. ALL ON TAXPAYER MONEY!!!! (Those lazy bastards!) And they pop out kids right and left so they can get ever MORE money! (Babies, as everyone knows are really cheap to raise. They're like potted plants!) Frankly I don't think that any of these millionaire right-wing talkers have ever met a poor person in their lives but yet they are all experts on them. And what is funny is that they seem to think that unless you dress in rags, live in a mud hut and eat twigs and dirt you aren't really poor. And even then they would still expect them to "pull themselves up by their own bootstraps." Sure our poor may have cars, TV's and the like but they are usually 2nd hand and not new. Actually I think that idiots like Cunningham hate the poor because they don't want their precious tax dollars helping anyone. Those tax dollars should go to the rich for bailouts and to the military.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by National_Insecurity (December 07, 2008 11:07 pm ET)
         

      While watching BBC America the other day - You are what you eat - the host made a very insightful, to me, comment, fat people are frequently malnourished.  

      The families she profiles eat massive volumes of food and calories, but they are undernourished. It's literally as though their bodies crave more nourishment, and they eat and eat - obviously the wrong foods - to achieve enough vitamins and minerals.  We no longer teach nutrition and home economics in public schools. So we get obese, malnourished people.

      (Nor to we teach music, so we get toneless rap and tonedeaf American Idol wannabees.)

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.