Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A lot of those fresh fruits and vegetables that the USDA provides comes from the DoD and their program which serves military installations, prisons, etc.
How are the parents supposed to educate their children about proper nutrition when they don't even know what that is in the first place?
If I teach my kids how to eat healthy and they go to school and get pizza and french fries and soda for lunch, how does that help me? I am completely in favor of school lunches and subsidizing them for the poor, but they should be the healthiest thing possible.
I'm shocked that the nutrition of our children has been politicized into some perverse right vs left issue. In this country we offer free public education to all, it's not perfect but it is what it is. It's also better than what most lesser countries have. It's also better than nothing. With education we also make available food to those who need to eat, even pay for it for those that need that sort of assistance. Why on earth should we give them junk food? Who does that benefit? Granted, the system needs work, it's not perfect, but it ain't really that bad either. I take the system we have now over no system at all. It's better than only those who can afford education getting education.
Nutrition should be taught and practiced alongside Physical Education, Finance, History, English, etc.
An algonquin roundtable of lunacy developing here.
And you're handcrafting it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlassoff
Here's news: I'm a Liberal. Please raise your own children. At the same time, I want my niece and nephew to have nutritious food in school.
Still someone has to tell exactly how this limits their freedom? Seems like hyperbole of the ignorant to me.
You are missing the entire point, just like a typical liberal.
You already have a governmental body that regulates nutrition in school. It's called the local school board. Look into it.
Schools existed prior to and at the time of the adoption of the US Constitution. If the authors of the constitution and its amendments wanted to the pseudo-federal government to have control over schools, they would have so stated in no uncertain terms in the constitution or its amendments.
However they did not and since anything not specifically enumerated for the pseudo-federal government is under the exclusive control of the states, the pseudo-federal government needs to keep its hands off.
If you have an issue with school nutrition, then you need to drag your lazy ass to a school board meeting and voice your concerns. If the school board ignores you, then you need to rally other members of your community to your support and if you can't then either send your child to school with lunch or put them in a private school, or run for a seat on the school board so you can effect changes.
I can't believe a first lady actually made such an ignorant statement...oh wait... given the frequency of her hubby's attacks on Americans, I can.
Her otherwordly statement does serve to reveal how our lawmakers really feel towards the taxpayers.
She is an embarrassing First Lady. But look at her husband!
The thing that really bothers me is that she is fighting so hard for nutrition when our country is in such a mess. I do believe nutrition is important, but that is certainly not an issue that should take first place during these times.
I can't believe a first lady actually made such an ignorant statement...oh wait... given the frequency of her hubby's attacks on Americans, I can.
Her otherwordly statement does serve to reveal how our lawmakers really feel towards the taxpayers.
I clicked on the link and one has to register to watch the video so I decided to pass; don't need anymore passowrds, etc. However, I would be willing to bet my life that M. Obama's statement was taken way out of context, as the RW is wont to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stayinformed40
She is an embarrassing First Lady. But look at her husband!
The thing that really bothers me is that she is fighting so hard for nutrition when our country is in such a mess. I do believe nutrition is important, but that is certainly not an issue that should take first place during these times.
It is SOP for first ladies to take on a nonpolitical "cause", such as Laura Bush's literacy, Lady Bird Johnson's highway beautification, and the like. The "left" never got on Laura's case, and the country was in a pretty big mess most of W's presidency.
I clicked on the link and one has to register to watch the video so I decided to pass; don't need anymore passowrds, etc. However, I would be willing to bet my life that M. Obama's statement was taken way out of context, as the RW is wont to do.
It is SOP for first ladies to take on a nonpolitical "cause", such as Laura Bush's literacy, Lady Bird Johnson's highway beautification, and the like. The "left" never got on Laura's case, and the country was in a pretty big mess most of W's presidency.
First, the country was NOT in near the mess with GWB as it is now. Period.
Second, I do recognize that it is SOP for first ladies to take on a nonpolitical cause.
However, literacy is a far better and more contributive cause than nutrition in schools. Educating our children is very important, as is making sure that all kids have an equal opportunity to receive a great education.
Nutrition in schools? Please! And for her to say that kids are receiving great meals at home and are concerned with what they are eating at school is a joke. Most kids in these economic times are thankful just to have a meal on the table, let alone a 'healty' one - which can actually be more costly.
I am not saying nutrition is not important - it is. I just think Michelle could have chosen a more worthwhile cause with all that is going on in our country right now. Nutrition? wow.
See my above comment about knowing something about the topic before goin on a rant. Does anyone who opposes this on these particular philosophical grounds have a clue about how the present school lunch program operates and how long it has been in existence? This is not a new program. The federal school lunch program started in 1932! Part of the purpose of the federal school lunch program is to help farmers, by giving them markets for their products.
Do educate yourselves before going off on a rampage of anger!
I would be saying the exact same things in 1932, it wasn't the federal government's purpose back then, and it's not their purpose today.
Our state governments are completely capable of conducting school lunch programs, the feds have no business sticking their noses into local issues. We are $13 trillion in debt, because the federal government thinks everything and anything is their damn business.
Nowhere in our Constitution does it say the purpose or function of the federal government is meddle in local state issues, nor does it state their function is creating an endless stream of new taxpayer funded federal program, in an attempt to solve every single problem and inconvenience, or to address every single grievance that an over obsessive citizen might express.
We are $13+ trillion in debt, and our government still thinks they must create a new multi-billion dollar federal program. When is enough every enough for these spendaholics and control freaks???
You are missing the entire point, just like a typical liberal.
You already have a governmental body that regulates nutrition in school. It's called the local school board. Look into it.
Schools existed prior to and at the time of the adoption of the US Constitution. If the authors of the constitution and its amendments wanted to the pseudo-federal government to have control over schools, they would have so stated in no uncertain terms in the constitution or its amendments.
However they did not and since anything not specifically enumerated for the pseudo-federal government is under the exclusive control of the states, the pseudo-federal government needs to keep its hands off.
If you have an issue with school nutrition, then you need to drag your lazy ass to a school board meeting and voice your concerns. If the school board ignores you, then you need to rally other members of your community to your support and if you can't then either send your child to school with lunch or put them in a private school, or run for a seat on the school board so you can effect changes.
I don't understand why we can't universally support good nutrition for school children.
I'm sure this would receive acceptance or at least silence on the right if proposed by a Republican.
Tell me: in what way does this limit your freedom.
Didn't you read what OP said? This is a parent's responsibility. Not the government. Why do they feel they need to be in every aspect of our life? Do you think someone in a remote office, that never eat public school lunch will know my kids better than me?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
