Obama Girls Enjoy 'Best School Lunch in America'...

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: ketsuko

A couple of questions occur:

1. Have you actually read the law, or the continuing USDA recommendations? Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act

I know this probably won't mean much to you, but it did a lot more than change nutritional requirements, like, expanded the number of poor kids who can qualify, as well as after-school programs, provides good drinking water, etc.

I ask because your presentation above seems ignorant of the actual requirements and implementations of the, you know, actual law. Or did you just know it was on the list of things Republicans are against?

2. Why weren't you making and sending your own lunches with your kids again? Why did you have to send them to private school? I must have missed your response.

/floats wisely contemplating the foolishness of arguing with foolishness

We sent my son to private school (or will) because of Common Core. I stated this before. You must have simply missed that?

I will be packing a lunch for my son on most days, and on the days I don't, he will be eating what the school has which is not bound by what Michelle thinks is appropriate.

However, I have to know ... why aren't her daughters bound by the same restrictions? Does she pack a lunch that similarly restricts her daughters to the exact same lunch rules all the public school kids are stuck with? If not, why not?

originally posted by: xuenchen
Hmmm.

Feds Order School to Ban Packed Lunches Without Doctor’s Note

failure begets failure

Had you read this thread thoroughly, you'd know that is a debunked hoax from 2001 and really infowars as a source, you should know better by now.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Hmmm.

Feds Order School to Ban Packed Lunches Without Doctor’s Note

failure begets failure

You know that's been discredited. The note regards a student enrolled in the Head Start program. Willingly enrolled, might add. Head Start has to provide lunches at NO COST to the parents. That's why the parent got the note.

How surprising for something on Alex Jones' site. Does it matter that this isn't true for most kids in most place in most schools?

a reply to: buster2010

Then how about you tell the FLOTUS to stop tampering with what our kids could eat in a public school?

We do pay for those lunches via our taxes, and even those of us who are able to make other arrangements pay for them.

Do you think any tax payer likes seeing the crap that our kids are given for lunch in a public school?

Why is it an acceptable excuse to simply say, "If you don't like, then pay for something else?" How about this, I don't like it. Now, give me the tax money I'm forced to shell out for it and let me spend it to send my son somewhere that will:

1.) Actually educate him (teach him the earth goes around the sun and how to read rather than the intricacies of gender ambiguity)

2.) Feed him while they're at it

a reply to: Connector

You posted while I was posting; but ... good post!

Never realized so many people were pro legalizing all drugs.

I mean the main concern here is the gov dictating what we put in out body regardless of the reasoning behind it.

So that same logic must extend to if some one wants to ingest what is considered a 'dangerous drug'.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: LeatherNLace

I don't care what they eat until SHE came around and told us what our kids had to eat and they starve as a result.

This was one more reason why my husband and I are beggaring ourselves to put our kid in a small private school. They are not beholden to Lady Obama's lunch commands so my son will get actual food for lunch, either the brown bag I serve him or the organic one of the parents caters in or the Waldo pizza they serve on Wednesdays. But yes, we are definitely going to feel that privilege in our finances. There are a lot of other things that money could have gone to.

Why send you kid to a private school when you can just send them to school with the brown bag you can make at home. Sounds like you just want to send your kid to a private school and you are just using Obama's lunch program as an excuse to do it.

Im guessing its not the lunches but manly the fact US state schools are crap and not fit for purpose.

Id know if I lived there id avoid sending my kid to those hell holes at all costs!

originally posted by: ketsuko

We sent my son to private school (or will) because of Common Core. I stated this before. You must have simply missed that?

I will be packing a lunch for my son on most days, and on the days I don't, he will be eating what the school has which is not bound by what Michelle thinks is appropriate.

However, I have to know ... why aren't her daughters bound by the same restrictions? Does she pack a lunch that similarly restricts her daughters to the exact same lunch rules all the public school kids are stuck with? If not, why not?

Well now. I am confused. You haven't sent your child to this private school yet? Or you have? You have beggared yourself, or you're going to. When does the new school start?

Here's what you said below (and yes, I did miss your one-line response to Buster) ...

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: LeatherNLace

I don't care what they eat until SHE came around and told us what our kids had to eat and they starve as a result.

This was one more reason why my husband and I are beggaring ourselves to put our kid in a small private school. They are not beholden to Lady Obama's lunch commands so my son will get actual food for lunch, either the brown bag I serve him or the organic one of the parents caters in or the Waldo pizza they serve on Wednesdays. But yes, we are definitely going to feel that privilege in our finances. There are a lot of other things that money could have gone to.

Again, this law passed in Congress, passed the Senate 100% (including Republicans). You're just misrepresenting the situation when you keep making out like the First Lady herself came around to schools and took food out of kids mouth's. I'm sure you don't mind repeating the same misinformation because it suits your agenda, but ... it's just not true.

a reply to: Sremmos80

Actually, it's more about the Government dictating what IT gets to put inside our kid's bodies; Parents be damned.
The only drug reference I've seen so far is the amount of penicillin they consume, via the moldy bread it allows.
That, apparently, is AOK, as long as Michelin Obama's guidelines are adhered to.

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
*sigh*

Faux outrage again.

They go a to a private school.

Of course they have better food, than public schools. You cannot compare one to the other, that's sort of asinine.

You're basically asking the Fed Gov to fund every school at the level that private schools do, in order for them to enjoy that kind of perk. Which is ridiculous.

~Tenth

And politicians should not be allowed to send there kids to private school.

Tney should use state schools and state everything,

If its good enough for the public then it should be good enough for the politicians that run it.

The real problem here demonstrates the utter flaws in the smaller-government-local-government theories so commonly espoused by some around here.

The Federal Government has given clear directions and information on healthier food for kids. The Federal Government has spent BILLIONS on the programs to make sure that State and local governments (you know, the one's that could run our lives so much better for us?) have sufficient means to do this, and the States and local School Boards are ultimately the ones mucking it up so badly.

But these are the very people some of you want to empower by limiting the power of the Federal Government. These numbskulls who are taking food away from your kids or trying to feed them moldy garbage.

You do realize that the school gets a hefty subsidy from the Fed for those meals, right? You do realize that, as usual, it's the graft and dishonesty at the local government level that's creating these problems you're all screeching about and blaming Michelle Obama for ...

... Right?

Ooopse ... itchy trigger finger.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Sremmos80

Actually, it's more about the Government dictating what IT gets to put inside our kid's bodies; Parents be damned.
The only drug reference I've seen so far is the amount of penicillin they consume, via the moldy bread it allows.
That, apparently, is AOK, as long as Michelin Obama's guidelines are adhered to.

Again, law passed by Congress, 100% in Senate (including Republicans).

Again, decisions on what to serve and how to serve it, local governments, not the Fed.

The substandard lunches are actually a symptom of the larger problem of the massive government micromanagement and intrusion into the public school system.
EVERY aspect of the school system has suffered in direct proportion to growing federal involvement.

Public school lunches are the canary in the coal mine.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: ketsuko

We sent my son to private school (or will) because of Common Core. I stated this before. You must have simply missed that?

I will be packing a lunch for my son on most days, and on the days I don't, he will be eating what the school has which is not bound by what Michelle thinks is appropriate.

However, I have to know ... why aren't her daughters bound by the same restrictions? Does she pack a lunch that similarly restricts her daughters to the exact same lunch rules all the public school kids are stuck with? If not, why not?

Well now. I am confused. You haven't sent your child to this private school yet? Or you have? You have beggared yourself, or you're going to. When does the new school start?

Here's what you said below (and yes, I did miss your one-line response to Buster) ...

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: LeatherNLace

I don't care what they eat until SHE came around and told us what our kids had to eat and they starve as a result.

This was one more reason why my husband and I are beggaring ourselves to put our kid in a small private school. They are not beholden to Lady Obama's lunch commands so my son will get actual food for lunch, either the brown bag I serve him or the organic one of the parents caters in or the Waldo pizza they serve on Wednesdays. But yes, we are definitely going to feel that privilege in our finances. There are a lot of other things that money could have gone to.

Again, this law passed in Congress, passed the Senate 100% (including Republicans). You're just misrepresenting the situation when you keep making out like the First Lady herself came around to schools and took food out of kids mouth's. I'm sure you don't mind repeating the same misinformation because it suits your agenda, but ... it's just not true.

He's 4 and will be starting in the fall. You must also miss the "are beggaring." We are going to do it. It starts as soon as payment schedule gets worked out.

But this isn't about me.

So you are completely fine with government schools that consistently fail kids and feed them crap while forcing you to pay for the privilege?

originally posted by: IAMTAT
The substandard lunches are actually a symptom of the larger problem of the massive government micromanagement and intrusion into the public school system.
EVERY aspect of the school system has suffered in direct proportion to growing federal involvement.

Public school lunches are the canary in the coal mine.

That's an interesting opinion.

And what were the schools like before "Federal involvement" as you call it?

Particularly since the States can't even afford to fund their own educational systems without Federal assistance?

(And most, never have been able to.)

So, what's the solution. Again, you've posed a problem; what's your answer?

a reply to: ketsuko

Four years-old eh? Wow, starting early! Believe me when I say I hope the whole thing goes well for you and your child!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Actually, it is about you because you're providing your own experiences/decisions as evidence in this discussion.

Do you really expect me to answer that loaded BS question?

They're public schools not "government schools"; they belong to all of us.

Schools consistently fail kids ... all kids, everywhere, all the time? I think that's totally inaccurate. I know many folks who came through the public school system and have gone on to great things.

I know plenty who were home-schooled or schooled in Christian "facilities" who are barely able to read and write.

You and your cohorts here, of course, have focused on the few and most unfortunate examples of the failure of the school lunch program. And yet, millions of kids get meals that they wouldn't have gotten, good meals, every day, and you just want ignore that fact.

I'm beginning to think you're living inside an echo chamber, Ketsuko.

a reply to: Gryphon66

First off...NO reforms (including school vouchers) would have made it through the Senate in the past six years under Harry Reid's leadership.

They would have been tabled and ignored by Reid...and never brought up for a vote ( as so many good reform proposals have been under the Obama-Reid stranglehold on congress).

No politician wants to vote against funding for education, as the opposition and press would run wild with it as saying they hate children and families. Ergo, funding for education is never voted down unedited...and intrusive new government regulations ALWAYS go along for the ride.
]

a reply to: IAMTAT

In other words, you want the childhood obesity rates to stay as they are, with no improvement. Wow - you really DO want America to be known for having the fattest and sickest population.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Gryphon66

First off...NO reforms (including school vouchers) would have made it through the Senate in the past six years under Harry Reid's leadership.

They would have been tabled and ignored by Reid...and never brought up for a vote ( as so many good reform proposals have been under the Obama-Reid stranglehold on congress).

No politician wants to vote against funding for education, as the opposition and press would run wild with it as saying they hate children and families. Ergo, funding for education is never voted down...and intrusive new government regulations ALWAYS go along for the ride.

Interesting opinions. Politically biased and therefore inaccurate in several ways, but interesting.

Again, ...

1) What were US schools like before "Federal involvement" as you call it? When is it you imagine that the Federal Government "started interfering" in education?

and

2) What is YOUR plan to fix the system? How are you going to educate the nations children to remain competitive with the rest of the world?