Seven Wyoming school districts drop Michelle O’s lunch rules

So, a few repubs are working to undo what MO and the USDA is trying to fix? Shocker. Not really.

 

The law says what kids have to eat. It isn't that hard.

If it isn't a law then why did Congress pass it? The law states what must be served.

So we agree that the dems had control of Congress.

Thanks for playing is rather appropriate here since I've posted the law which you refuse to accept.

 

Are you hung up on whole grain pasta? I don't like it either, but that certainly doesn't negate a good diet or portion control.. My children are ALL healthy, thin and muscular...flat bellied like me and their father. They ate tons of food ... heavy on vegetables and fruits.. lots of rice since we were in Charleston.. and small portions of meats.

 

I'm really hung up on nothing except the govt dictating what schools should serve.

God bless you for taking control of you kids lives and eating habits. That should be your call, not DC's.

 

You mean like the "intellectual choice" of eating tasteless food or not eating at all? Because that's the only choice the mandated lunch program is nurturing.

There is vast difference between "promoting" a product and making a product available as a choice. But since you believe "intelligent choice" is nurtured by "eat this or go hungry", I'm not surprised you're a little confused on what the difference actual is.

.

Oh please. Schools have been promoting and teaching about nutrition for 40 years, maybe more, and no one is arguing they should stop, are they? No! So give that one a rest.

Nothing as far this discussion. I favor promoting education centered on self-responsibility, not dictate.

Fine, then you agree MO's federal mandate is out of line.

LOL..."its working"?....(now where have I heard those words before???).....who says "it's working" (besides you) and what standards are they using to make that claim?

 

It's always been a gov't sanctioned program.

 

Really? I don't recall the govt telling schools that this was a bad food and that was a good food. Not until this leftist administration came along.

 

Why won't you answer my question?

 

Which is not the same as when you said that the kids must eat this food.

No, as they did not. I would not agree to something factually incorrect.

 

Don't be cute. The lunch program is a gov't program. All she did was suggest revisions to it. It's only the folks that dislike anything to do with her that are whining. Kind of like the repub in your link.

 

If you're referring to the "hypocrite" question, I did respond by following your logic full circle. Guess you missed it.

 

And I rebutted and asked you another question.

 

Republicans say they may intervene before then. Alabama Rep. Robert Aderholt, the Republican in charge of the House spending committee overseeing USDA, has said school districts need a "pause" while problems are worked out.

Like I said: the repubs are trying to undo it.

 

I'll be whatever I want. You don't like it, ignore it. How's that sound?

Get educated and look up the actual bill...........

Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 Summary
www.ncsl.org/.../healthy-hunge...
National Conference of State Legislatures
On December 13, 2010, the President signed the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, reauthorizing numerous child nutrition programs until September 30, ..

>>>MOD EDIT: INSULTING A GROUP<<<

 

If the result of the program is an increasing number of full garbage cans after lunch, I would say it has failed its purpose.

 

So you want kids to break the law. Got it.

 

I disagree.

- - - Updated - - -

Note, there is no law saying kids must eat this food.

 

Your logic needs work...the programs are completely different. It's like trying to compare your dogs vet with obamacare as they both are about health care!

 

So you want them to starve.

 

That does not sound like an accurate representation of my position.

 

I disagree.

 

Take it or leave it doesn't sound like the goals of feeding school children is being well served and it doesn't sound like the left cares.

 

Of course! They never really care. They are dogmatic social engineers who foist their rules upon others but would never live by them.

 

Which is good, except their really isn't anything like "food stamps" any longer. EBT cards can be used for almost any purchase. Hell, until recently EBT'ers could get cash at the Casino ATM. So, at this point, how would even begin to control what types of food is purchased, because EBT cards are basically just debit cards funded by tax payers.

Yes, and here's why; federal mandates seldom, if ever, work efficiently over the long run and this one won't either. It's already failing and for good reason, the food in many cases is tasteless and unappealing and the kids aren't eating it. So, the question becomes, is it more important they eat something, even if it's not considered top shelf healthy, not eat at all, or be forced to bring a lunch, which in all likelihood wouldn't meet MO's approval anyway. And there's the other angle, funding. Public schools are funded by tax payers, many of whom have kids in the schools. So, it's those parents who are forced to deal with MO's decision making process, not MO, who's kids by the way, are enjoying the best of best lunches at Sidwell.
Now lets be clear, no one is suggesting public schools open a McD's in the lunch room or supply soda & potato chips on demand, because serving kids nutritious food is important. But MO has taken a good concept and, rather than use education to educate, is using it as an instrument to force compliance via federal policy to comply with her approval. So to put it simply, I don't disagree with idea of serving nutritious food in schools, far from it, but I highly disagree (at multiple levels) with the method MO's is using in all this.

 

And now Chicago school districts are giving up on Queen Michelles lunch program.

So what can we learn from all this? Clearly, Chicago is racist. That is all.