Kids Flee the Lunch Line

LOL wrote: Sounds like a win win. Reduced usage, savings for taxpayers. Teach the kiddos at a young age that the Federal government is dictating their menu of mandated ickky food and small portions. They need a smiling pic of Michelle and Barrack at the beginning of the lunch line, and Federal Food Cops stationed at the Trash cans. :rofllol


"Did anyone notice the PROBLEMS with Mrs. Obama’s Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act?"

Uh, I noticed that Michelle Obama is not an elected representative, and not even a Federal Employee. So Priviate citizens can enact rules and mandates over the entire country too? Cool!

..." Why scrap a failing program when you can expand it instead?

The expansion, which will impact more than 20,000 school across the country, reports the Washington Post, "will provide free breakfast and lunch to all students in schools where at least 40 percent of the children are low-income."

That change is intended "to increase participation in the free meals program and to relieve the paperwork burden on schools," reports the Post.

Apparently there's no federal paperwork requirement related to the even greater mountain of food waste caused by the policy change.

Kids are protesting with their mouths. They're opting out of school lunches and throwing away food they don't want to eat. But they're also fighting back with their minds."...

This could work out well if kids realize that cradle to grave nannyism is bad for them.

http://reason.com/archives/2014/04/12/n ... outrage-co

LOL wrote: "Did anyone notice the PROBLEMS with Mrs. Obama’s Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act?"

Uh, I noticed that Michelle Obama is not an elected representative, and not even a Federal Employee. So Priviate citizens can enact rules and mandates over the entire country too? Cool!

Did anyone notice that Mrs. Obama's SUGGESTIONS are NOT rules or mandates, and that no one is required to follow them?

Gee, I guess that would be a PROBLEM for the teabaggers...They wouldn't have anything to be outraged about if none of it was mandatory, or required....

Unless, of course, you have a SOURCE that proves that her suggestions carry any kind of rule-of-law.

:Snooze


Outrage is kind of like foreplay for you guys, ain't it? :LMAO: :rofllol

I already posted a link to the 80 some pages of requirements and comments from the concerned local food service workers and menu planners, parents, etc. in schools (i.e. Teabagger pond scum types). And I predict a second time that no one here will read the long document. These are not just guidelines or suggestions. Try pages 13-14 if you are too lazy and uninformed to read all of it.

LOL wrote: LOL, just some simple "guidelines" archer? Your assignment is to read the 81 final rule pages and comments. All these public comments from parents and state and local food service people must just be paranoia I guess. And for the record it is the USDA not the FDA. Never ever get yer gov't regulators mixed up!

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-01 ... 2-1010.pdf

http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/governance/ ... ndards.htm

I predict nobody will read the 81 pages. I speed readed it! LOL

And because one school district decided to implement them officially (which is a local school board decision), that's supposed to translate to EVERY school district being forced to implement them?

Yeah right...

LadyJazzer wrote: And because one school district decided to implement them officially (which is a local school board decision), that's supposed to translate to EVERY school district being forced to implement them?

Yeah right...

I am glad that you agree that this is something that should not me mandated by the feds. :BeerSalute

That's twice I was correct and the regulations I posted were not read. LOL

Hey! Hang on just a second here. We could possibly be overlooking a way to save some money and feed kids meals that are good enough for the men and women defending our nation. If the left wants to federalize skule lunches and before and after skule meals why not tap a source that is already in production?!

[youtube:1bq95vka][/youtube:1bq95vka]

With the planed reduction in force across the DoD there will be a surplus of MREs, why let that "good food" go to waste? There are added bonuses too, you don't need a big fancy kitchen or a staff of cooks and servers either, think about how many people would no longer be "job-locked"! Heck I bet if skule boards asked nicely the DoD would gladly unload a shipping container on the each skule's property for free. Instead of having commercial providers distribute the food, active DoD units in the areas around skules could take on distributing the MREs instead, trucks and fuel are already paid for, and the service members are already on the Federal payroll! More money saved and other people freed from their slavery aka jobs!

I especially enjoyed the video (mostly because we all know that recruiters are 100% truthful in everything they say), the recruiter has obviously given this presentation before (anyone else notice he didn't eat anything?). I get opening the pound cake, you can add that to the pouch of peaches and that's actually close to edible. I'm not sure if the DoD is still issuing "chocolate" bars in the current generation of MREs; there's something very wrong with a chocolate bar that doesn't melt at 110F and tastes more like a candle than chocolate.

Oh wait... Are kids allowed to eat "chocolate" on Michelle's skule lunch plan?

I had them for around a week while playing soldier in Panama. I liked them but to be fair it was just lunch. The Army supplied a hot dinner.

All us sailors thought this was the best part though and an easy way to make fun of the soldiers.



A rock or something. :rofllol :rofllol

A certain service member who will remain nameless (me) was known for collecting the unused heaters and crafting all manner of IEDs. It's funny to watch a kid who just ate and is dozing off react to the sound a plastic Gatorade bottle makes when the contents of an MRE heater and some water get capped off and are allowed to expand! lol

There were a few other alleged incidents involving a tent pole and some improvised projectiles but I'm not authorized to discuss that.

Besides, imagine how much better the nation's children would be able to learn in our public skulze with bellies full of MREs! Let's do it for the children! There might have to be some "flatulence authorized" zones set up for the kids but wouldn't it be worth it?

LadyJazzer wrote: Did anyone notice that Mrs. Obama's SUGGESTIONS are NOT rules or mandates, and that no one is required to follow them?

Gee, I guess that would be a PROBLEM for the teabaggers...They wouldn't have anything to be outraged about if none of it was mandatory, or required....

Unless, of course, you have a SOURCE that proves that her suggestions carry any kind of rule-of-law.

Outrage is kind of like foreplay for you guys, ain't it?

Of course we do. Her "suggestions" were adopted by the person Obama chose to oversee the department (don't want to get on the man's "enemy" list by ignoring his wife, do you?) and codified into rules and regulations which govern and oversee how the program is operated. Her "suggestions" are now official policy of the department and there are consequences for ignoring them. Those consequences include withholding of federal funds for failure to comply, just like the federal government "suggests" the several States adopt their maximum speed limit on the interstate highway system, or "suggests" that they drop the BAC level for driving under the influence to 0.08, or "suggest" that the several States pass a primary seat belt law. Of course, the withdrawl of funds for not following the "suggestions" doesn't also include relief from the laws which require that low income students be provided a "free" lunch, it just withdraws the funds to pay for the mandated program.