First Lady Michelle Obama thinks all you helpless parents out there just aren't up to the job of properly feeding your kids without the benevolent government stepping in to help:
"We can't just leave it up to the parents"
What arrogance. These two simply have to insert themselves into every single aspect of the peasants' lives, don't they?
Perhaps Ms. Obama should take care of her own, ahem, wide caboose as well as Dear Leader's smoking habit before she presumes to lecture the rest of us about our health habits.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
She's talking about serving higher quality food in schools, when parents aren't there, what's wrong with that?
Because the what state and local schools serve kids for lunch isn't the federal government's job, Purewater. It's indeed the responsibility of the parents who pay taxes and elect school-board members to ensure that their kids get nutritious food, not Big Daddy in Washington.
Actually they've made it their job with the Dept. of Education, whether you like it or not. Those parents are really doing a "great" job ensuring all the students get nutritious meals across the country huh? There's not 1 in a 100 schools that have instituted improved eating programs. Why? Because a)parents are either too busy to care and/or ignorant on nutrition; or b)the schools can't afford to remove the vending machines because their budgets are strapped paying absurd union salaries and pension.
I guess you'd rather see children eat a bunch of crap and be unhealthy than let Obama pass a piece of legislation that, for once, that actually does something to improve the sorry state of this country.
Ok Purewater, you will cite the Article and Section of the Constitution that gives the Feds the ability to do anything with schools, much less dictate menus?
I will give you a hint, it isn't in there.
If my child eats unhealthy crap, that is my business, not anyone else's.
I do agree, we need to cut the heart out of the unions. But we also need to cut out a lot of the crap the schools are doing now.
And the other side of the coin that most people that are saying "It is for the children, therefore we need to just blindly do it."
I was talking to a neighbor that just got elected to the local school board, and his reaction was as follows: The bill, as it is written, gives the directive to improve meal plans and reduce unhealthy foods offered in schools. Good move right? Sure it is, except for the fact that the increase in cost that it is mandating is going to mean fewer teachers or services. So, while we'll have healthy kids, they will have to do with less education. Your choice.
No.
No, let me rephrase that. "HELL, NO!"
Will it do any good? Keep in mind here that the nutritional mess that is the school lunch was originally started BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT during the Great Depression, and through the following 70+ years has served as a way of helping the government offload billions of tons of surplus meat, cheese, oil, and such.
In other words, the feds don't exactly have a great record in this regard, and hence it's not exactly intuitive that anything would change now, to put it mildly.
Post a Comment