It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Steals Cookie from Child!

page: 8
27
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

If its a state school then I say there no problem. USA has a obesity problem. If a the state wants to put restrictions on a state school then so be it.


If it was a private school I would see the issue.



That's why we're in the situation we're in. We let too much BS pass.

From the 'Swing Kids' movie,

Arvid:


"It's not just one song, or that's all, don't you see? Anytime you go along with them, anytime you try to help them it just makes it easier"




posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 05:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Daedalus

bottom line, having the government be able to come in and say "ya' know what? we don't think you should be able to eat that anymore, so we're going to make it illegal", only reinforces the government's authority over everyone.....and accepting it, creates an entire generation, that is far more predisposed to accept government authority, in essence, breeding more sheep.....


I don't think it's illegal. It's more like "if you want us to keep funding your school, you'll take the crap out of your lunch menu." I'm sure if the school would have changed to being a private school and stopped taking any government funding, they could have had all the pink cookies they wanted. No big bad mean government telling them they couldn't.

Did you ever think that some parents may have actually wanted the cookie taken off the menu? At my daughter's elementary school, they sold ice cream bars during lunch. The school had cards (like credit cards) that held a balance for each kid to buy lunches with. They would send me an email when the balance got down to a certain point - about once every 3 months - and I had to put more money into it. Anyway, my daughter kept using the card to buy the ice cream. I told her not to, but she'd do it anyway, stupidly thinking I wouldn't figure it out. It was just too tempting for a third grader (I guess she just didn't want to accept my authority). I know other kids were doing the same thing, because some of the parents complained, and they ended up taking the ice cream bars away. I'm sure that ticked off the parents who didn't mind the ice cream bars, but too bad - their kids can get ice cream at home.

As much as you may think you are, you are not entitled to pink cookies in a public school. You are entitled to adequate curricula and adequate nutrition offered during the lunch break, and you are entitled to having your kids in a safe, protected place.

There is no such thing as government funding. It is the people's money for the purpose of funding schools. The government has no right (or shouldn't) to withhold our money, from our schools over something this stupid. I didn't pay my taxes to give the government power over us.



posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

unfortunately, the reality seems to disagree with you.



posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 05:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Daedalus
yes, but if the parent is giving the child the dollar for the cookie, that means the parent approved the purchase of the cookie...


Then let the kid buy cookies from the store or better yet, let mom or dad bake up a batch of 500 calorie cookies and stuff their kids' lunch bag FULL of them!





bottom line, having the government be able to come in and say "ya' know what? we don't think you should be able to eat that anymore, so we're going to make it illegal", only reinforces the government's authority over everyone


1. It's a government school. They're not "coming in" ... it's THEIR school.
2. The government is not making the cookies illegal, they're saying WE aren't going to sell this product anymore.
3. This is a government-run school. If it were a private business, you all would be screaming that they should be allowed to sell or not sell whatever they want! (which is true).



posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Boo hoo.... Find another recipe



posted on Aug, 23 2014 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: thirdcoast

Carlin would not be likely to take sides here. To him in that clip the govt isn't the problem- we're the problem. This is the best we can do- passing the buck on our own kids and then complaining about the result.

Its hard to say where he'd come down on the pink cookie because 5 years after that clip was recorded he wrote complaints and grievances under the working title "I kinda like it when a lot of people die" but also considered calling it "The Great American Cattle Drive". So he'd probably be against fat children until one of them had a coronary and then he'd think it was funny, but I can't be sure.

All I can really be sure of is that I wish he was here to unload some hostility on this whole thread.

Aside from all that though, who begged the government to intervene? Nobody cared about these fat children at any point, not enough to change a recipe and certainly not enough to change the government. The government did its thing herding and shaping future kids, the government's agents larded up the kids for an extra buck, the new figurehead leader signed some papers just to look busy, some unimportant backwater school nobody ever thought about was claimed to be singled out by someone else appropriating the children for political reasons, and some more of us including me treated it as a semi serious issue and let it be a public debate because it's the closest thing to influence the people get.

If you count the tangible effects, the school loses a few bucks, the kids either lose 200 calories or their parents lose five minutes to get other cookies, one side lost its mind and the other side wasted it's time helping them do so. Business as usual in America. We got our bs and our spoons and our luls and there's no point getting all worked up about it and decrying the state of things. Just go buy a cookie and look out for yourself. That's probably what I'm gonna do now.



posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 09:17 AM
link   
i cant believe people are actually upset over this.

the federal program, whatever it is called says that all snacks must be under 200 calories. this cookie wasnt so its gone.

i really dont see the issue. IF this fabulous cookie was so beloved and fantastic then maybe they(whoever is in charge of snack making) can tweak the recipe a little bit to get it down to 199 calories. then people will have their beloved cookie.

what a load of crap.

like i said. i live in elyria. i have 1 child in school and one that will be old enough soon and i have not heard anything about this until i read it here.
it may be an issue for you ats'ers but im telling you its a non issue around here



posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
Then let the kid buy cookies from the store


so you'd rather they ate processed crap from a factory bakery, instead of something baked fresh, on-site?



or better yet, let mom or dad bake up a batch of 500 calorie cookies and stuff their kids' lunch bag FULL of them!


now, that's just silly....





yes, because ALL american kids look like this -rolleyes-



1. It's a government school. They're not "coming in" ... it's THEIR school.


No, it's not. It is a state, or county issue. the federal government has ZERO constitutional authority in these matters..



2. The government is not making the cookies illegal, they're saying WE aren't going to sell this product anymore.


the federal government passed a law, that makes these cookies technically illegal, as they don't meet the requirements established in the law. if the state was saying "we don't think this is a good idea, so we're not going to do it anymore", that would be different...but the district is saying "we can't do it anymore, because the federal government won't allow it"...this is the problem, federal interference in what is clearly a state matter....



3. This is a government-run school. If it were a private business, you all would be screaming that they should be allowed to sell or not sell whatever they want! (which is true).


if by "government", you meant state government, then you would be right...but we both know that is NOT what you meant.

you don't seem to understand, at all, how this is supposed to work. take new jersey for example....even if a district was so screwed up, that it had to be reclassified as an abbott district (take asbury park for example), this would STILL only be at a state level, because what happens when a district is reclassified in that way, is the state basically takes over the district, installs state monitors, and tries to fix the district...the federal government still has no part in it...

the simple fact of the matter is that it's federal overreach....i don't give a flying firetruck if it's a goddamn cookie, or federally mandated cameras in every room of your home, it's still overreach, and it's still wrong...

your post is full of nonsense.




posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: CardiffGiant

well, i mean, sure..if you don't have a problem with the federal government meddling in affairs it has no constitutional authority to be meddling in, then i'm sure, to you, it's a non-issue....but to the rest of us, who live in the real world, federal overreach, regardless of the scope, is bad, and wrong, and to be opposed.
edit on 8-24-2014 by Daedalus because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 05:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Daedalus

Oh please, pull the other leg!

This is only an issue for hothead conservatives that have absolutely nothing better to discuss.

There's been several solutions to this problem addressed already.

State issue, ffs!



posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Daedalus
the simple fact of the matter is that it's federal overreach...



THEY TOOK MY COOKIE!!!



posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 05:30 PM
link   
Well...I'm surprised this thread made it to the front page, let alone that it is still going. Let me just say this. The federal government is overreaching, and under Obama...overreaching by miles. They have forgotten their place and are attempting a coup over the American people. They need to be put back in their place, and if that isn't possible, they need to be dismantled. Our government is out of control like a dog who growls at his master, and needs to be treated the same. Put a muzzle on it and kick it in the ass. Or...if that doesn't work, take it for a long walk in the woods. Then get a new dog.



posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 05:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Daedalus


the federal government passed a law, that makes these cookies technically illegal, as they don't meet the requirements established in the law. if the state was saying "we don't think this is a good idea, so we're not going to do it anymore", that would be different...but the district is saying "we can't do it anymore, because the federal government won't allow it"...this is the problem, federal interference in what is clearly a state matter....



Okay, you've had your turn, now it's time for some actual facts:

The national School Lunch Program is an OPTIONAL/VOLUNTARY federally assisted meal program that helps fund free and low-cost lunches. Public schools and non-profit private schools can opt to get this assistance. BUT, there is a catch. If you want the funding, you have to abide by their guidelines. If you don't want to abide by their guidelines, fine - but you won't get the assistance.

www.fns.usda.gov...


The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is a voluntary program available to all public and private schools, and residential child care institutions which agree to operate a non-profit program offering lunches meeting federal requirements to all children in attendance.


www.isbe.state.il.us...


So, it's not a law making it illegal to offer pink cookies at lunch. You don't go to pink cookie jail if you serve the pink cookies. But if you serve the pink cookie, you don't get the dough. It's the school's decision.



posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Daedalus

Zero constitutional authority to regulate schools is marginally arguable but you are most likely correct.
However, they do have the constitutional authority to change the federal budget, which is negligible UNTIL you factor in grant programs that can change everything for a school. Purse strings and interstate commerce every time- it's like the federal government's little anti constitution magic wand. The only recourse is to fix your local school on a grass roots level to such an extent that they can't or least don't have to let themselves be paid to make the wrong decisions with your kids... well that or keep your kids home and raise them yourself. Seriously I view the local schools where I'm from with such contempt and animosity that if my only option was to send a kid there I simply wouldn't have the kid to begin with. I'd rather give my kid a phone a knife and a bus pass and tell them to just wander until they learned something before I'd subject them to the people who made me turn out this normal (I assume most of you have picked right up on the fact I'm not normal, but just to be sure...)



posted on Aug, 24 2014 @ 06:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: beezzer


People are angry because people are complaining about government taking away a 40 year tradition.


Sounds to me like you're saying that pink cookies are an entitlement.

Isn't that what you are saying?


I'm saying that the school should offer it, but no-one is entitled to eat it. It should be a choice. (you are pro-choice, aren't you?)
You do realize that children could just bring their own cookies right? I'm pretty sure the government isn't the only provider of pink cookies. It doesn't invalidate anyone's choice. If pink cookies were being banned, you might have a point, but they aren't so you don't.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: Daedalus


the federal government passed a law, that makes these cookies technically illegal, as they don't meet the requirements established in the law. if the state was saying "we don't think this is a good idea, so we're not going to do it anymore", that would be different...but the district is saying "we can't do it anymore, because the federal government won't allow it"...this is the problem, federal interference in what is clearly a state matter....



Okay, you've had your turn, now it's time for some actual facts:

The national School Lunch Program is an OPTIONAL/VOLUNTARY federally assisted meal program that helps fund free and low-cost lunches. Public schools and non-profit private schools can opt to get this assistance. BUT, there is a catch. If you want the funding, you have to abide by their guidelines. If you don't want to abide by their guidelines, fine - but you won't get the assistance.

www.fns.usda.gov...


The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is a voluntary program available to all public and private schools, and residential child care institutions which agree to operate a non-profit program offering lunches meeting federal requirements to all children in attendance.


www.isbe.state.il.us...


So, it's not a law making it illegal to offer pink cookies at lunch. You don't go to pink cookie jail if you serve the pink cookies. But if you serve the pink cookie, you don't get the dough. It's the school's decision.

You are obviously correct. But...whose money is that? What was that tax meant for? It was meant for schools and Obama and gang are withholding it from those it was intended for...over a cookie. THAT is the point. This government collects taxes to help pay for schooling for our children. We pay that tax to help in schooling our children. Who the F gave this president the option of saying...I'm not going to give the institution you paid this tax for, to them...because I don't want them serving that cookie.

Get it? It is f'ing stupid. Take the money we paid, give it to the schools that are doing their job (teaching our children) and shut up Obama! Don't use my money to blackmail schools. THAT WASN'T THE INTENT!!!

PS: This money IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S MONEY!!!! It is ours.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 05:36 PM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

That money is strictly earmarked towards lunches only!

Not education.

Voluntary program, they can opt out, go to the PTA meetings.

Otherwise please buy your kids their own pink cookies.



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 02:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: HauntWok
a reply to: Daedalus

Oh please, pull the other leg!

This is only an issue for hothead conservatives that have absolutely nothing better to discuss.

There's been several solutions to this problem addressed already.

State issue, ffs!


there you go again, wok....painting with a broad brush, and assigning labels....

i'm neither a "conservative", nor a "hothead"...i'm simply someone who dislikes federal overreach...

it IS a state issue, whether you like it or not..



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 02:24 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

who the hell is talking about the national school lunch program?

this is because of the "healthy, hunger-free kids act of 2010"...yes, it's tied to the NSLP, as part of it's re-authorization, but it's just a component...

it's not really the school's decision when they're being strong-armed, now is it?



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 02:25 AM
link   
a reply to: BritofTexas

how cute....

do you suppose you could act like an adult for 5 seconds, and stop with the partisan nonsense?



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join