Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Roger Bacon on July 19, 2014, 12:53:30 PM
-
Is it the Obama's secret goal to become as unpopular as they can? They're making the Bush family look good.
Michelle Obama Just Declared War On This Beloved Restaurant, And You Won’t Be Happy About It
First Lady Michelle Obama is declaring war on your favorite chicken sandwich and waffle fries.
The White House has officially condemned Chik-fil-A, the controversial fast-food franchise known for its Christian values and “original chicken sandwich.”
Many public schools across the U.S., including one South Carolina district, sells Chik-fil-A at lunch. The sandwiches sell far better than the school-cooked lunch items and profits contribute to extra-curricular activities for underprivileged and special needs students.
Read more: http://americanoverlook.com/michelle-obama-just-declared-war-on-this-beloved-restaurant-and-you-wont-be-happy-about-it/22073
-
Is it the Obama's secret goal to become as unpopular as they can? They're making the Bush family look good.
Michelle Obama Just Declared War On This Beloved Restaurant, And You Won’t Be Happy About It
First Lady Michelle Obama is declaring war on your favorite chicken sandwich and waffle fries.
The White House has officially condemned Chik-fil-A, the controversial fast-food franchise known for its Christian values and “original chicken sandwich.”
Many public schools across the U.S., including one South Carolina district, sells Chik-fil-A at lunch. The sandwiches sell far better than the school-cooked lunch items and profits contribute to extra-curricular activities for underprivileged and special needs students.
Read more: http://americanoverlook.com/michelle-obama-just-declared-war-on-this-beloved-restaurant-and-you-wont-be-happy-about-it/22073
They haven't condemned Chik-fil-A you bozo. Michelle gave nutritional guideline so that kids can eat healthier. Schools can choose whether to follow them or not....its not the law.
And quite frankly, it would save billions of dollars in medical bills if they were followed
-
They haven't condemned Chik-fil-A you bozo.
ROFL ;D
-
They haven't condemned Chik-fil-A you bozo. Michelle gave nutritional guideline so that kids can eat healthier. Schools can choose whether to follow them or not....its not the law.
And quite frankly, it would save billions of dollars in medical bills if they were followed
Maybe obama should start herself and his husband
-
did she come up with these guidelines? If not then who did? On top of that she if the first lady, not the POTUS, she wasn't elected. So who exactly gave her the fucking power to mandate what kids can eat? This is getting ridiculous.....
-
They haven't condemned Chik-fil-A you bozo. Michelle gave nutritional guideline so that kids can eat healthier. Schools can choose whether to follow them or not....its not the law.
And quite frankly, it would save billions of dollars in medical bills if they were followed
though you make the correct point, it will not please SC and others. Or Fox News. But don't let facts get in the way. :)
-
Check out the sodium content of the Chic-Fil-A basic chicken sandwich.
-
This heart attack is guaranteed to put 20 lbs of fat on you. There is a third more sodium in this sandwich then the recommended daily amount.
-
Here you go; this is the kid's meal. It is even more unhealthy that the two sandwiches previously posted. More that 2.5 times the daily intake of sodium and almost enough calories for and entire day for a kid.
-
Who gives a fuck? Not obama or his husbands role to tell people what to eat.
-
Who gives a fuck? Not obama or his husbands role to tell people what to eat.
x2
-
Kids love chocolate milk.
Combine this with the kids meal and the school district will save a fortune on field trips because most of the kids will be too fat to get on the bus.
-
Kids love chocolate milk.
Combine this with the kids meal and the school district will save a fortune on field trips because most of the kids will be too fat to get on the bus.
Kids have been drinking Chocolate milk since the 1680's.
-
Who gives a fuck? Not obama or his husbands role to tell people what to eat.
Weren't you a fat guy at one time? With the rates of childhood obesity and early onset type II diabetes, it is pretty clear a lot of parents aren't helping their kids make good food choices these days.
Pay now or pay later; field trips or trips to the doctor's office for insulin shots.
-
Check out the sodium content of the Chic-Fil-A basic chicken sandwich.
Macros in that sandwich look fine to me.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16431193
^^ might want to read that since you apparently think the USDA Daddy Knows Best when it comes to salt intake.. especially for people your age.
-
Weren't you a fat guy at one time? With the rates of childhood obesity and early onset type II diabetes, it is pretty clear a lot of parents aren't helping their kids make good food choices these days.
Pay now or pay later; field trips or trips to the doctor's office for insulin shots.
Didnt need fatchelle to motivate me
-
Macros in that sandwich look fine to me.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16431193
^^ might want to read that since you apparently think the USDA Daddy Knows Best when it comes to salt intake.. especially for people your age.
Surely the government knows best?
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/USDA_Food_Pyramid.gif)
-
Kids have been drinking Chocolate milk since the 1680's.
Roger, that chocolate milk was made with cocoa powder and whole milk. The shit they serve today is non-fat milk with chocolate syrup and sugar added.
There are also 5 milligrams of caffeine in each mini carton of chocolate milk. Chocolate has oxalic acid, which reacts with the calcium in the milk producing calcium oxalate, thus preventing the calcium from being absorbed in the intestine. However, it is present in small enough amounts that the effect on calcium absorption is negligible. As chocolate contains relatively small amounts of oxalate, it is unclear to what extent chocolate consumption affects healthy people with calcium-rich diets.
In a 2008 study, participants who consumed one or more servings of chocolate on a daily basis had lower bone density and strength than those participants who ate a serving of chocolate six times a week or less. Researchers believe this may be due to oxalate inhibiting calcium absorption — but it could also be due to sugar content in chocolate, which may increase calcium excretion. It is clear, however, that consuming foods high in oxalate — and in turn their effect on calcium absorption — is a more significant concern for people with oxalate kidney stones, which occur when there is too much oxalate in the urine. These people, especially, should reduce their oxalate intake and increase their calcium intake. However, the high magnesium content in chocolate is likely to reduce the risk of stone formation, because like citrate, magnesium is also an inhibitor of urinary crystal formation.
Despite the above there have been studies which showed the benefits of chocolate milk. If it is so good for us, why is it making kids fat? At the elementary school where I worked kids would get chocolate or strawberry flavored milk to pour over there sweetened cereal in the morning. They would have another carton at lunch and for those kids who were around for afternoon snacks they'd get another carton of chocolate milk.
-
Roger, that chocolate milk was made with cocoa powder and whole milk. The shit they serve today is non-fat milk with chocolate syrup and sugar added.
Okay, good point
-
Didnt need fatchelle to motivate me
Of course not. Weren't you an adult when you decided to get healthy?
If parents were more hands on insisting schools provide healthy foods or better yet packed their kids lunches, the problem with kids eating crappy wouldn't be as great and there would be nothing for Michelle Obama to champion. Unfortunately that isn't happening, just look around you.
Just so you know, Chic-Fil-A isn't the only problem. Many fast food companies are pushing their products to school age kids via the big food service companies such as Sodexho-Marriott. There is chicken nuggets with a bunch of strange non-chicken stuff in them. Kids love them. They are probably less healthy then the food you feed your dog. Hamburgers are anything but, they are so full of fillers. Trust me, anyone who has even a smattering of knowledge about nutrition would never let their kids eat school lunches unless they were hoping to kill them off.
-
LMAO @ the libs on here (Primemuscle) defending Mooshell's hit on Chik-fil-a. Hahahaha! If it were Muslim owned they would be funding franchises with our money. lol
-
LMAO @ the libs on here (Primemuscle) defending Mooshell's hit on Chik-fil-a. Hahahaha! If it were Muslim owned they would be funding franchises with our money. lol
So are you saying that liberals care about what their kids are served in schools, while conservatives don't. Michelle is entitled to an opinion, same as you and me. Apparently, she is concerned about the crap lunches kids get in schools. When I looked at Chic-Fil-A's own nutrition guide, I found it frankly shocking that they have such an unhealthy menu and they are selling it to kids who will essentially eat anything that tastes good, regardless of whether it could kill them or not.
I'll ignore you Muslim comment because it is completely irrelevant here. The fact that you find it so funny simply makes you out to be the fool. Your views are stunted and narrow-minded, not conservative like you'd have people believe. Conservative folks I know, are concerned for their children's wellbeing just the same as any liberal is. You are completely off base here.
-
So are you saying that liberals care about what their kids are served in schools, while conservatives don't. Michelle is entitled to an opinion, same as you and me. Apparently, she is concerned about the crap lunches kids get in schools. When I looked at Chic-Fil-A's own nutrition guide, I found it frankly shocking that they have such an unhealthy menu and they are selling it to kids who will essentially eat anything that tastes good, regardless of whether it could kill them or not.
1. Mooshell is entitled to an opinion but not to mandate anything. 2. Why are you shocked? It's fast food. Are you "shocked" that Carl's Jr, Mc Donalds and every other fast food joint does the same thing only worse? Why not bring those up? I'd be willing to bet that In-N-Out is on their hit list because they're a Christian owned company.
I'll ignore you Muslim comment because it is completely irrelevant here. The fact that you find it so funny simply makes you out to be the fool. Your views are stunted and narrow-minded, not conservative like you'd have people believe. Conservative folks I know, are concerned for their children's wellbeing just the same as any liberal is. You are completely off base here.
Do you actually think the Government knows best about how to raise our children or that the majority of parents know the difference between good foods and bad? If fast food companies want to add healthy choices or not, it's up to them, not the Mooshell or any government. If I choose to let my kid have fast food, then it's MY choice.
You don't take away people's ability to think for themselves.
-
Kids have been drinking Chocolate milk since the 1680's.
Kids in the 1680 bailed hay, feed the animals, plowed fields, and hunted rather than sit around and play video games all day.
-
Weren't you a fat guy at one time? With the rates of childhood obesity and early onset type II diabetes, it is pretty clear a lot of parents aren't helping their kids make good food choices these days.
Pay now or pay later; field trips or trips to the doctor's office for insulin shots.
Not the governments responsibility to mandate what our kids can and cant eat at school. Thats should be up to the schools/locals officials and parents. Different states have different culinary tastes and trying mandate what kids eat is overbearing and an abuse of federal authority, especially since michelle obama has zero fucking authority to do anything.
Its one thing to encourage parents to start taking an interest in their kids health and eating habits, but trying to ram it down their throats is only going to make kids go the other way and want nothing to do with it.
I believe many of the schools that tried this reported that most of their kids simoky started bringing their own lunches with even shittier food because they refuse to eat the shit menu obama is trying to force on the entire country, and that they've lost more dollars in sales than they gained in federal aid, so they said fuck it and went back to their old system and gave up the fed dollars.
-
i'm really hungry for chik fila after reading these posts.
-
Not the governments responsibility to mandate what our kids can and cant eat at school. Thats should be up to the schools/locals officials and parents. Different states have different culinary tastes and trying mandate what kids eat is overbearing and an abuse of federal authority, especially since michelle obama has zero fucking authority to do anything.
Its one thing to encourage parents to start taking an interest in their kids health and eating habits, but trying to ram it down their throats is only going to make kids go the other way and want nothing to do with it.
I believe many of the schools that tried this reported that most of their kids simoky started bringing their own lunches with even shittier food because they refuse to eat the shit menu obama is trying to force on the entire country, and that they've lost more dollars in sales than they gained in federal aid, so they said fuck it and went back to their old system and gave up the fed dollars.
Neither Michelle or President Obama are mandating anything. It happens to be the law, albeit one which was signed into law by the President after it passed Congress by a clear majority.
In 2010 the U.S. Congress passed S. 3307 (111th): Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010
Number: House Vote #603 [primary source: house.gov] Date: Dec 02, 2010 (111th Congress) Result: Passed
If you are interested in seeing how your elected officials voted in 2010, check out this website: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/111-2010/h603
This legislation passed by a clear majority, however few Republicans supported it as might be expected since there is a hefty price tag on the implementation of the law.
I agree that it should be the parents responsibility to insure their children get a healthy diet. Unfortunately, this doesn't always happen. Fat and unhealthy kids from middle class and wealthy families aren't likely to be a burden on society since their families probably have health insurance. Kids living in poverty or near poverty, automatically become everyone's problem, since it is all the rest of us who pay to cover their medical costs. I suppose we could just wash our hands of all this caregiving and just let folks die. The world is overpopulated anyway, right?
-
i'm really hungry for chik fila after reading these posts.
Oregon does not have Chic-Fil-A or In and Out Burger establishments.
-
Who gives a fuck?
...
Parents, probably.
-
So are you saying that liberals care about what their kids are served in schools, while conservatives don't. Michelle is entitled to an opinion, same as you and me. Apparently, she is concerned about the crap lunches kids get in schools. When I looked at Chic-Fil-A's own nutrition guide, I found it frankly shocking that they have such an unhealthy menu and they are selling it to kids who will essentially eat anything that tastes good, regardless of whether it could kill them or not.
I'll ignore you Muslim comment because it is completely irrelevant here. The fact that you find it so funny simply makes you out to be the fool. Your views are stunted and narrow-minded, not conservative like you'd have people believe. Conservative folks I know, are concerned for their children's wellbeing just the same as any liberal is. You are completely off base here.
Coach, you got sonned here.
-
Oregon does not have Chic-Fil-A or In and Out Burger establishments.
sounds like oregon is a liberal cesspool.
-
Parents, probably.
That's actually the point - to the elite statists, parents are assumed to be too stupid to feed their children properly without government supervision. Obviously the same government who institutionalized the lipid hypothesis based on "feelings" and "moral superiority of vegetarianism" should be in charge of regulating what my kids eat.
Maybe Obama can get his BFF government health adviser Dr Dean ornish to create a meat free, fat free , grain based school menu (with low sodium so prime muscle doesn't get offended)
-
sounds like oregon is a liberal cesspool.
I highly recommend you never move here. You wouldn't like it.
-
That's actually the point - to the elite statists, parents are assumed to be too stupid to feed their children properly without government supervision. Obviously the same government who institutionalized the lipid hypothesis based on "feelings" and "moral superiority of vegetarianism" should be in charge of regulating what my kids eat.
Maybe Obama can get his BFF government health adviser Dr Dean ornish to create a meat free, fat free , grain based school menu (with low sodium so prime muscle doesn't get offended)
Yes apparently many parents are either too stupid or just don't give a flying fuck about their children's diet. If that were not the case, why is the incidence of childhood type II diabetes and obesity on the increase? Until you go to school and personally see what your kids (assuming you even have kids) are being fed, you really don't have a clue what you are talking about.
-
That's actually the point - to the elite statists, parents are assumed to be too stupid to feed their children properly without government supervision. Obviously the same government who institutionalized the lipid hypothesis based on "feelings" and "moral superiority of vegetarianism" should be in charge of regulating what my kids eat.
Maybe Obama can get his BFF government health adviser Dr Dean ornish to create a meat free, fat free , grain based school menu (with low sodium so prime muscle doesn't get offended)
I don't know. I don't consider myself clueless about diet (got 2nd in my class at the NPC Contra Costa back in '99) but it was news to me that the Chic-Fil-A kid's meal was so high in sodium.
Call me a crappy dad or whatever but I have a hard time just keeping track of what my little rug-rat even thinks tastes good much less what the sodium content is of something like chicken strips.
My argumentative daughter is 8 years old and I think I might actually like to be able to tell her that she couldn't eat something I don't want her to eat because it's "against the law", lol. Shoot, I'll even blame Obama if that's what it takes.
-
Bingo. Liberalism never takes human nature into account. Its all about force coercion and stepping on people
Not the governments responsibility to mandate what our kids can and cant eat at school. Thats should be up to the schools/locals officials and parents. Different states have different culinary tastes and trying mandate what kids eat is overbearing and an abuse of federal authority, especially since michelle obama has zero fucking authority to do anything.
Its one thing to encourage parents to start taking an interest in their kids health and eating habits, but trying to ram it down their throats is only going to make kids go the other way and want nothing to do with it.
I believe many of the schools that tried this reported that most of their kids simoky started bringing their own lunches with even shittier food because they refuse to eat the shit menu obama is trying to force on the entire country, and that they've lost more dollars in sales than they gained in federal aid, so they said fuck it and went back to their old system and gave up the fed dollars.
-
sounds like oregon is a liberal cesspool.
lol
Bingo. Liberalism never takes human nature into account. Its all about force coercion and stepping on people
Yes!
-
lol
Yes!
Sure....of course. ::)
-
Yes apparently many parents are either too stupid or just don't give a flying fuck about their children's diet. If that were not the case, why is the incidence of childhood type II diabetes and obesity on the increase? Until you go to school and personally see what your kids (assuming you even have kids) are being fed, you really don't have a clue what you are talking about.
thank you for posting something rational. Don't worry, SC will come along shortly.
-
You don't like it, don't eat it or let your kids eat it.
It shouldn't take a big govt intervention from a bored, neglected, jealous, sexually frustrated, power-hungry first lady to "save us" from the evils of fast food.
-
You don't like it, don't eat it or let your kids eat it.
It shouldn't take a big govt intervention from a bored, neglected, jealous, sexually frustrated, power-hungry first lady to "save us" from the evils of fast food.
-Guess you also believe Michelle Obama is the law and not just that she is supporting a law the U.S. Congress passed in 2010.
-
President Obama tells kids he 'loses his mind' over guacamole
LA Times ^ | July 18, 2014 | Rebecca Bratek
Posted on July 19, 2014 8:06:57 PM EDT by Innovative
President Obama made a culinary confession Friday: He “loses his mind” over chips and guacamole.
The president made a brief, surprise visit to the East Room to address 54 children and their guardians, shortly after speaking to the press corps about the Malaysian airliner shot down over Ukraine yesterday.
“We are currently spending $10 billion a year on our school lunch programs,” she said. “So it’s not surprising that there are certain interests that are resisting change and trying to take us back to the old ways of doing business.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
-
President Obama tells kids he 'loses his mind' over guacamole
LA Times ^ | July 18, 2014 | Rebecca Bratek
Posted on July 19, 2014 8:06:57 PM EDT by Innovative
President Obama made a culinary confession Friday: He “loses his mind” over chips and guacamole.
The president made a brief, surprise visit to the East Room to address 54 children and their guardians, shortly after speaking to the press corps about the Malaysian airliner shot down over Ukraine yesterday.
“We are currently spending $10 billion a year on our school lunch programs,” she said. “So it’s not surprising that there are certain interests that are resisting change and trying to take us back to the old ways of doing business.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Your point? Guacamole is a relatively healthy food. A few lower sodium corn chips are a healthier snack than most.
According to the nutrition information from online food database MyFitnessPal, 1 oz. of chips contains 142 calories, while 1/2 cup of guacamole contains 127 calories, so the two contain 269 calories together. The calorie expenditure information from MayoClinic.com suggests you could burn off these 269 calories during an hour of bicycling.
Compared to a Chic-Fil-A chicken sandwich this is far healthier food. Incidentally, the fats in avocado are considered good fats as opposed to the shit fast food is fried in.
-
Yes apparently many parents are either too stupid or just don't give a flying fuck about their children's diet. If that were not the case, why is the incidence of childhood type II diabetes and obesity on the increase? Until you go to school and personally see what your kids (assuming you even have kids) are being fed, you really don't have a clue what you are talking about.
The kids are THROWING THE FOOD in the trash, costing millions of dollars. So, Michelle Obama's schtick isn't working.
-
The kids are THROWING THE FOOD in the trash, costing millions of dollars. So, Michelle Obama's schtick isn't working.
Liberals' are mostly clowns and fools and whenever their unicorn and pony ideas go kaput they are left dumb founded
-
Liberals' are mostly clowns and fools and whenever their unicorn and pony ideas go kaput they are left dumb founded
;D
-
Here you go; this is the kid's meal. It is even more unhealthy that the two sandwiches previously posted. More that 2.5 times the daily intake of sodium and almost enough calories for and entire day for a kid.
Ok. So then what? If parents want their kids to eat it, let them eat it.
-
Ok. So then what? If parents want their kids to eat it, let them eat it.
the problem is that there is always the kid who shows up with 4 hershey bars in his lunch every day.
Or a can of mountain dew and some beef jerky.
Aside from the whole debate about whether the schools should be able to help the kid have proper nutrients for physical human growth...
I bet nobody here realizes that kids who eat like crap, feel like crap, and act out in school, disrupting the learning process for others and making schools less effective. Just like your boss CAN tell you not to drink a fifth of vodka before work, because it impairs your ability to function at work. But teachers/admin cannot tell a kid not to eat 25 pixie sticks for lunch because it impairs the students ability to function, learn, and not act the fool?
Nobody talks about that part of the issue. Kids that eat garbage feel like garbage, and act up in a big way.
-
the problem is that there is always the kid who shows up with 4 hershey bars in his lunch every day.
Or a can of mountain dew and some beef jerky.
Aside from the whole debate about whether the schools should be able to help the kid have proper nutrients for physical human growth...
I bet nobody here realizes that kids who eat like crap, feel like crap, and act out in school, disrupting the learning process for others and making schools less effective. Just like your boss CAN tell you not to drink a fifth of vodka before work, because it impairs your ability to function at work. But teachers/admin cannot tell a kid not to eat 25 pixie sticks for lunch because it impairs the students ability to function, learn, and not act the fool?
Nobody talks about that part of the issue. Kids that eat garbage feel like garbage, and act up in a big way.
Yes the kid who brings for Hershey bars for lunch every day. And the kid who brings live chickens, kills them at lunch, and eats them raw. Happens all the time.
-
Yes the kid who brings for Hershey bars for lunch every day. And the kid who brings live chickens, kills them at lunch, and eats them raw. Happens all the time.
??? It does happen every day. I do not know why you introduced killing live chickens into the conversation, that's kinda weird.
But yes, kids do show up with awful lunches every day at schools. I spent about 7 years in the classroom, and I spent a ton of time in lunch room. 98% of kids had decent lunches. But some did not. And no surprise, it was the same 2% with little to no lunch, or lunch full of garbage, that were acting up in class. They were hungry, hyper, or just plain felt like crap.
A lot of people debating lunchroom stuff haven't been in an elementary lunchroom in 30 years lol.
-
??? It does happen every day. I do not know why you introduced killing live chickens into the conversation, that's kinda weird.
But yes, kids do show up with awful lunches every day at schools. I spent about 7 years in the classroom, and I spent a ton of time in lunch room. 98% of kids had decent lunches. But some did not. And no surprise, it was the same 2% with little to no lunch, or lunch full of garbage, that were acting up in class. They were hungry, hyper, or just plain felt like crap.
A lot of people debating lunchroom stuff haven't been in an elementary lunchroom in 30 years lol.
Oh he gets it. Saying kids "show up with awful lunches every day at schools" is not the same as a kid showing up with "four Hershey bars" every. What your ridiculous hypotheticals show is you don't spend much time in the real world.
I agree that some kids may show up with "awful" lunches at school. That doesn't mean the government should takeover nutritional choices for kids.
-
Oh he gets it. Saying kids "show up with awful lunches every day at schools" is not the same as a kid showing up with "four Hershey bars" every. What your ridiculous hypotheticals show is you don't spend much time in the real world.
I agree that some kids may show up with "awful" lunches at school. That doesn't mean the government should takeover nutritional choices for kids.
I have no problem with govt staying out of lunchboxes - unless there is a real problem. In that case, a solution that nobody talks about - is taking pics of what the kid has, documenting it, and giving only THAT kid a school lunch.
When there's a documented nutritional deficit taking place on a regular basis. THEN you give the kid a lunch TOO, and let him keep his crap.
That's my solution. there really are 80 IQ parents with no $, and their lunch packing skills do reflect this. Schools can fix that, nothing wrong there.
IMO this is just an over-reaction to a minor issue because it has michelle obama's face on it. people without kids are screaming about this issue, but haven't mentioned the US national debt in 6 months. I dont get it.
-
but we cant do that on a case-by-case basis only for the terrible parents because that's discrimination.
in an ideal world (where government agencies weren't run by idiots and incompetent and corrupt) I'd have no problem with shitbags living on the taxpayers dime having their kids lunches monitored by those who pay their bills, since they've proved they are incompetent - but the progressives who push these Big Society plans can't go hurting anyone's feelings.
But if someone is a functional adult who pays taxes then Big Government can fuck off
-
but we cant do that on a case-by-case basis only for the terrible parents because that's discrimination.
in an ideal world (where government agencies weren't run by idiots and incompetent and corrupt) I'd have no problem with shitbags living on the taxpayers dime having their kids lunches monitored by those who pay their bills, since they've proved they are incompetent - but the progressives who push these Big Society plans can't go hurting anyone's feelings.
But if someone is a functional adult who pays taxes then Big Government can fuck off
I am in full favor of Food Depots to where these welfare slugs have to walk 3-5 miles to the depot - get a 40lbs bag of rice or beans for a month, and that's it
Next month they can come back
-
The kids are THROWING THE FOOD in the trash, costing millions of dollars. So, Michelle Obama's schtick isn't working.
Among other issues this points out how indulged many if on most young people are today. If I'd thrown food in the trash simply because I didn't like it, there would have been consequences. While the rule of thumb was that I had to taste what was served. If I didn't like it. I didn't have to eat it all but there would be nothing to replace what I didn't eat. Another thing, portions weren't so ginormous that there was enough to feed an army on my plate. This all had nothing to do with economics, since my parents were fairly well off. It was just how things were done at that time.
The food served at school was not the most appetizing and there was often not much selection. There certainly wasn't multiple selections like there are today. Pizza was unheard of. For all of my elementary school years, my mom packed my lunch because she thought it healthier than the food served at school. One funny thing I remember about high school was kids dipping the tip of their straw in the glue like brown gravy served over the mainstay instant mashed potatoes and then blow it as hard as they could off the straw towards the very high cafeteria ceiling. By the end of the year, there was an abundance of stalactite like straw papers hanging from the ceiling. The custodial staff probably cursed us come summer, when they'd have to clean them off ceiling.
So, in keeping with today's indulgent child rearing style, we should by all means only serve young people the food they like, disregarding good nutrition and their health in favor of keeping them happy. Michelle Obama, what are you thinking? Let the kids eat the Chic-Fil-A lunches they so love! Their parents don't seem concerned that they might become obese or get type II diabetes, so what makes you believe you have the right to intervene by supporting the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act passed by Congress in 2010?
-
I am in full favor of Food Depots to where these welfare slugs have to walk 3-5 miles to the depot - get a 40lbs bag of rice or beans for a month, and that's it
Next month they can come back
I'm in favor of you moving to a third world country so you can live among people doing just that as opposed to you supporting turning the U.S. into such a place. I don't recommend you talk trash about their leaders like you do ours though; you'd either wind up in jail or dead.
-
Among other issues this points out how indulged many if on most young people are today. If I'd thrown food in the trash simply because I didn't like it, there would have been consequences. While the rule of thumb was that I had to taste what was served. If I didn't like it. I didn't have to eat it all but there would be nothing to replace what I didn't eat. Another thing, portions weren't so ginormous that there was enough to feed an army on my plate. This all had nothing to do with economics, since my parents were fairly well off. It was just how things were done at that time.
The food served at school was not the most appetizing and there was often not much selection. There certainly wasn't multiple selections like there are today. Pizza was unheard of. For all of my elementary school years, my mom packed my lunch because she thought it healthier than the food served at school. One funny thing I remember about high school was kids dipping the tip of their straw in the glue like brown gravy served over the mainstay instant mashed potatoes and then blow it as hard as they could off the straw towards the very high cafeteria ceiling. By the end of the year, there was an abundance of stalactite like straw papers hanging from the ceiling. The custodial staff probably cursed us come summer, when they'd have to clean them off ceiling.
So, in keeping with today's indulgent child rearing style, we should by all means only serve young people the food they like, disregarding good nutrition and their health in favor of keeping them happy. Michelle Obama, what are you thinking? Let the kids eat the Chic-Fil-A lunches they so love! Their parents don't seem concerned that they might become obese or get type II diabetes, so what makes you believe you have the right to intervene by supporting the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act passed by Congress in 2010?
Michelle Obama needs to worry about her own kids and let me raise mine. I've forgotten more about nutrition than she'll ever know.
Kids aren't getting fat because of Chic-Fil-A, contrary to your rather strange claim. And you act as if the kids were being served nothing but Pop Tarts and Doritos all day long. That was hardly the case. She arrogantly thinks that, because she was too stupid to know what to feed her kids (despite her Ivy league 'education'), everyone else must be as daft as she is, in that venue.
-
Michelle Obama needs to worry about her own kids and let me raise mine. I've forgotten more about nutrition than she'll ever know.
Kids aren't getting fat because of Chic-Fil-A, contrary to your rather strange claim. And you act as if the kids were being served nothing but Pop Tarts and Doritos all day long. That was hardly the case. She arrogantly thinks that, because she was too stupid to know what to feed her kids (despite herIvy league 'education'), everyone else must be as daft as she is, in that venue.
She also claimed that even with a Princeton and Harvard education she didn't know what healthy food was.
But she or anyone isn't forcing kids to eat certain foods at school. Until that happens, nothing to see here.
-
She also claimed that even with a Princeton and Harvard education she didn't know what healthy food was.
But she or anyone isn't forcing kids to eat certain foods at school. Until that happens, nothing to see here.
The operative word is 'Until'.
-
The operative word is 'Until'.
That's just fear propaganda as far as i am concerned. There would be major public outcry before it ever became a law.
-
The operative word is 'Until'.
Republicans want to rape poor peoples children.
Show me an example you say? I cant right know but...
The operative word is 'Until'.
-
Michelle Obama needs to declare war on her fupa
-
but we cant do that on a case-by-case basis only for the terrible parents because that's discrimination.
we do it all the time for students in school.
IEP = individual education plans. Behavioral plans. Language plans. Emotional and other handicaps. They have paperwork for every possible limitation kids face, and students are given adaptations for it. Assitants helping out, more time on tests, certain technologies, etc. It's happening in every school in the nation.
If a kid has a reeces for lunch, and nothing else, hey... that's abuse, isn't it? Neglect? If children's service (or DC or whatever it is called in each state) were to visit the home, and REECES were the only thing in the fridge to eat, that kid would be taken away pretty quickly and moved to foster care. Schools don't try to interfere that way - they just hand the kid a free lunch, and let him keep his reeces too.
I guess what I'm saying is - all the people screaming about schools seeing poor nutrition and giving the kids free food to supplement their meal - Are you guys also that mad that state agencies will put a kid in foster care if he's eating the same thing for dinner? LOL if anything, schools aren't doing enough, if this is the case.
-
-Guess you also believe Michelle Obama is the law and not just that she is supporting a law the U.S. Congress passed in 2010.
No, I believe it's just another useless piece of legislation passed by the Obama admin - the same guys who brought us Obamacare and a bunch of other crap that just gives them more control over our lives and costs us more money one way or another.
Perhaps she needs some hobbies or to have an affair or something for the next year and a half or so.
-
No, I believe it's just another useless piece of legislation passed by the Obama admin - the same guys who brought us Obamacare and a bunch of other crap that just gives them more control over our lives and costs us more money one way or another.
Perhaps she needs some hobbies or to have an affair or something for the next year and a half or so.
what legislation was passed regarding what our children can bring to school to eat?
-
It would also help if the messenger wasn't very overweight. :-\
-
what legislation was passed regarding what our children can bring to school to eat?
None that I'm aware of as of yet. Do you think they should?
Do you enjoy big brother making up more rules as they go along controlling your life more and costing you more money? Do you need them to tell you what to do and make your decisions for you?
How much did your health insurance go up in the past year?
-
None that I'm aware of as of yet. Do you think they should?
Do you enjoy big brother making up more rules as they go along controlling your life more and costing you more money? Do you need them to tell you what to do and make your decisions for you?
How much did your health insurance go up in the past year?
Of course i don't think they should.
However i do think they should mandate that healthy foods (within reason) only be served at public schools AND allow to parents to send their kids with whatever food they want.
68% >:(
Note: some of this thread is SNIOP-ed with fear propaganda. until actual legislation is proposed and pushed, there is nothing to see here but garden variety BS.
-
It's clear many of you have reading comprehension difficulties. Again Congress passed The Healthy Hunger - free Kids Act in 2010. President Obama signed it into law,
also in 2010.
It is the law. The "until" several of you mentioned, already happened. Pay attention children.
Does the law restrict parents from sending their kids to school with foods they choose for lunch?
-
Republicans want to rape poor peoples children.
Show me an example you say? I cant right know but...
The operative word is 'Until'.
The Dems beat them to it. Look at all the inner city kids and the living conditions in which they find themselves. Which party runs their cities, counties, and school boards again?
-
The Dems beat them to it. Look at all the inner city kids and the living conditions in which they find themselves. Which party runs their cities, counties, and school boards again?
Don't bother, anyone can see what welfare and section 8 housing has accomplished.
-
That's actually the point - to the elite statists, parents are assumed to be too stupid to feed their children properly without government supervision. Obviously the same government who institutionalized the lipid hypothesis based on "feelings" and "moral superiority of vegetarianism" should be in charge of regulating what my kids eat.
Maybe Obama can get his BFF government health adviser Dr Dean ornish to create a meat free, fat free , grain based school menu (with low sodium so prime muscle doesn't get offended)
if you look at the obesity problem with children in usa most parents are to lazy/stupid to feed their kids good healthy food.
i have no idea what this chick a file thing is so i have no comment about that
-
i have no idea what this chick a file thing is so i have no comment about that
Christian restaurant that's extremely clean, amazing service from cheerful girls, best chicken sandwiches and fries in the world. They usually donate food to churches and community service projects and stuff.
Chic-Fil-A
;D
(http://blogs.denverpost.com/thespot/files/2012/07/chickfila-sandwich.jpg)
(http://media.chick-fil-a.com/Media/Img/catalog/Pressroom/ImageLibrary/restaurants/Chick-fil-A-in-mall-lg.jpg?download=true)
(http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/files/2012/07/chick-fil-a-store-clean2.jpg)
(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/08/04/nyregion/BELIEFS2/BELIEFS2-articleLarge.jpg)
-
Sure if they aerved hallal meat iman auatollah obama would love it
-
Does the law restrict parents from sending their kids to school with foods they choose for lunch?
I have not read the law in its entirety. I suspect it does not restrict parents from sending their kids off to school with a home packed lunch. At the school where I worked, over 80% of the students were on the Federal free or reduced meals program. Students were fed breakfast, lunch and an afternoon snack. Since all students, paying or not, got the same food choices, those choices had to comply with the standards required by the Federal program. The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 likely just further addresses the nutritional value of the foods in the Federal program. A private school, where no kids would be on free or reduced meals, could feed the kids caviar on crackers for a snack if they wanted. Going to the opposite extreme, a private school with no students on free or reduced meals could require all students bring bag lunches from home.
-
Christian restaurant that's extremely clean, amazing service from cheerful girls, best chicken sandwiches and fries in the world. They usually donate food to churches and community service projects and stuff.
Chic-Fil-A
;D
(http://blogs.denverpost.com/thespot/files/2012/07/chickfila-sandwich.jpg)
(http://media.chick-fil-a.com/Media/Img/catalog/Pressroom/ImageLibrary/restaurants/Chick-fil-A-in-mall-lg.jpg?download=true)
(http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/files/2012/07/chick-fil-a-store-clean2.jpg)
(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/08/04/nyregion/BELIEFS2/BELIEFS2-articleLarge.jpg)
I bet their sandwiches are tasty. With that level of calories, fat and salt, it better taste good. Unfortunately, foods that taste good are not always good for you. Sugar, fat and salt all enhance flavor without adding much if any nutrition.
-
I have not read the law in its entirety. I suspect it does not restrict parents from sending their kids off to school with a home packed lunch. At the school where I worked, over 80% of the students were on the Federal free or reduced meals program. Students were fed breakfast, lunch and an afternoon snack. Since all students, paying or not, got the same food choices, those choices had to comply with the standards required by the Federal program. The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 likely just further addresses the nutritional value of the foods in the Federal program. A private school, where no kids would be on free or reduced meals, could feed the kids caviar on crackers for a snack if they wanted. Going to the opposite extreme, a private school with no students on free or reduced meals could require all students bring bag lunches from home.
That was the context of the word "until", not "until" they pass a law regarding what food is served. read up on page 3 of the thread, before you talked about reading comprehension. ;)
Some peeps here are reacting to "fear propaganda" in that they fear Michelle will cause a law to get passed that restrict kids from bringing other foods to school. Far from it.
-
So when will this new ObamaKillChicFilA law prohibiting all children from ever eating at Chic-Fil-A again be repealed by the Repubs? ;D
-
I bet their sandwiches are tasty. With that level of calories, fat and salt, it better taste good. Unfortunately, foods that taste good are not always good for you. Sugar, fat and salt all enhance flavor without adding much if any nutrition.
Yeah, they are by far an upper level Fast food chain as far as taste goes. but its still massed produced fast food.
-
Obama is not exactly the best spokesman here. He is always seen high, drunk, drinking beers, scarfing down ice cream, burgers dogs, etc. Same for his husband.
-
Obama is not exactly the best spokesman here. He is always seen high, drunk, drinking beers, scarfing down ice cream, burgers dogs, etc. Same for his husband.
Thank God he was elected.
-
Obama is not exactly the best spokesman here. He is always seen high, drunk, drinking beers, scarfing down ice cream, burgers dogs, etc. Same for his husband.
weird how no one else except you "sees" him like this but then again that's probably a good thing because if the public actually saw him that way and he still won 2 elections what does that say about your side (and by your side I'm of course referring to Republican and not mentally ill, self hating, closeted homosexuals such as yourself)
-
all any of this shit means is that some corporate friend of the Obama administration is about to get a HUGE government contract to sell his food to our public schools. and this will make some very rich white man with grey hair a lot richer white man with grey hair. congrats liberals!
meanwhile the Obama administration panders to the lemmings and proclaims that this as "Mrs. Obama is concerned about the kids health". AWWW.
yeah OK ::).
its funny how all the hardened conspiracy theorists of 2000-2008 have lost all of their mojo from 2008-present.
i'll say it again. for the 1000th time. all anyone cares about is gay marriage and abortion. you're all just pretending to care about this shit.
-
I'm in favor of you moving to a third world country so you can live among people doing just that as opposed to you supporting turning the U.S. into such a place. I don't recommend you talk trash about their leaders like you do ours though; you'd either wind up in jail or dead.
i'm in favor of him switching water bottles that have a pop up top and not one that has he has to unscrew. and can't
-
all any of this shit means is that some corporate friend of the Obama administration is about to get a HUGE government contract to sell his food to our public schools. and this will make some very rich white man with grey hair a lot richer white man with grey hair. congrats liberals!
meanwhile the Obama administration panders to the lemmings and proclaims that this as "Mrs. Obama is concerned about the kids health". AWWW.
yeah OK ::).
its funny how all the hardened conspiracy theorists of 2000-2008 have lost all of their mojo from 2008-present.
i'll say it again. for the 1000th time. all anyone cares about is gay marriage and abortion. you're all just pretending to care about this shit.
the fairy tales you right wingers make up and pass around are just hilarious
I have no doubt you actually believe this narrative even though you just thought it up
-
How much did your health insurance go up in the past year?
Mine and my wife's health insurance went down by about $100 a month each, since you asked.
-
Mine and my wife's health insurance went down by about $100 a month each, since you asked.
Mine went up 1300 a year plus 5k in deductible.
-
Mine went up 1300 a year plus 5k in deductible.
Guess your law practice is doing well. Keep up the hard work
-
That was the context of the word "until", not "until" they pass a law regarding what food is served. read up on page 3 of the thread, before you talked about reading comprehension. ;)
You are right about this. My mistake. I deleted the post to which you refer. Clearly, I was reading things into people's posts which weren't there. My apologies to anyone I might have offended.
-
You are right about this. My mistake. I deleted the post to which you refer. Clearly, I was reading things into people's posts which weren't there. My apologies to anyone I might have offended.
lol no worries. I figured you just skimmed some of the posts which i do often and are mistaken.
I think its a good thing something is being done about the food served at schools. Its better than letting schools serve crap, even though some may argue about the "improvement" and all those that benefit financially and otherwise.
-
lol no worries. I figured you just skimmed some of the posts which i do often and are mistaken.
I think its a good thing something is being done about the food served at schools. Its better than letting schools serve crap, even though some may argue about the "improvement" and all those that benefit financially and otherwise.
In previous times, many school districts had inhouse food service programs. My opinion is that overall the food which the school cooks actually prepared from scratch was healthier and better tasting. Locally, a few districts have gone back to inhouse food service programs. Most school districts, however, get food from the big (for profit) food service companies, such as Sodexho-Marriott. Most of their products are highly processed foods. As I mentioned, the ingredient list on their chicken nuggets would make anyone cringe. Although the nuggets taste okay, they definitely aren't just chicken. There are a lot of fillers in the product.
Most of the hot foods are shipped frozen and already prepared. Essentially, all the cooks need do is pop them in the oven to warm before serving. Breakfast foods are some of the worst of the worst. Lots of sugar loaded foods served at breakfast.
-
all any of this shit means is that some corporate friend of the Obama administration is about to get a HUGE government contract to sell his food to our public schools. and this will make some very rich white man with grey hair a lot richer white man with grey hair. congrats liberals!
meanwhile the Obama administration panders to the lemmings and proclaims that this as "Mrs. Obama is concerned about the kids health". AWWW.
yeah OK ::).
its funny how all the hardened conspiracy theorists of 2000-2008 have lost all of their mojo from 2008-present.
i'll say it again. for the 1000th time. all anyone cares about is gay marriage and abortion. you're all just pretending to care about this shit.
And right now that huge government contract belongs to chik-fil-a, who produce crap food for the kids. Try again .
-
Mine went up 1300 a year plus 5k in deductible.
then you have lousy insurance. find another one.
-
Obama is not exactly the best spokesman here. He is always seen high, drunk, drinking beers, scarfing down ice cream, burgers dogs, etc. Same for his husband.
Is that how you see him? Is that a side effect of Jungle Fever?
-
then you have lousy insurance. find another one.
False - its New York State - that is the lowest cost one. The rest are even higher and worse.
ObamaCare is a disgrace and pos
-
then you have lousy insurance. find another one.
The premiums are higher for him seeing his past history of mental illness. On the bright side, they can't rule being a fag (which is way worse than being gay) as a pre existing condition anymore. Once pills come out to cure that afflictions, his insurance will be worth the extra dime or two.
-
The premiums are higher for him seeing his past history of mental illness. On the bright side, they can't rule being a fag (which is way worse than being gay) as a pre existing condition anymore. Once pills come out to cure that afflictions, his insurance will be worth the extra dime or two.
Creepy as fuck you are
-
Creepy as fuck you are
Queer as fuck you are. Again, how much physical pain comes from all the self loathing you do? There isn't a cure for shortness and mental illness yet. So it's got to be tough dealing with that. Living in the ghetto doesn't help much either does it?
-
And right now that huge government contract belongs to chik-fil-a, who produce crap food for the kids. Try again .
This is funny, when I was in school you should have seen the crap they served in the lunch room. Commodity pizza, shit was so greasy people would use half a container of napkins to soak it up. Something they called hot dogs, greasy ass french fries. Cookies....... No one seemed to give a shit then, why now all of the sudden? Oh thats right it for the children ::). Maybe they should try teaching them some skills that might actually be useful in the real world. No lets focus on school lunches.
-
This is funny, when I was in school you should have seen the crap they served in the lunch room. Commodity pizza, shit was so greasy people would use half a container of napkins to soak it up. Something they called hot dogs, greasy ass french fries. Cookies....... No one seemed to give a shit then, why now all of the sudden? Oh thats right it for the children ::). Maybe they should try teaching them some skills that might actually be useful in the real world. No lets focus on school lunches.
Exactly. I mean we had some shit you could barely identify. And don't ask me about the mashed potatoes which was like potato flavored water. Some days the only "meat" we had were in the form of 3 tiny little sausage links.
-
This is funny, when I was in school you should have seen the crap they served in the lunch room. Commodity pizza, shit was so greasy people would use half a container of napkins to soak it up. Something they called hot dogs, greasy ass french fries. Cookies....... No one seemed to give a shit then, why now all of the sudden? Oh thats right it for the children ::). Maybe they should try teaching them some skills that might actually be useful in the real world. No lets focus on school lunches.
Do you think that's the whole focus in schools? Lunches? I agree our schools need much work, but why feed them food that causes them to be sluggish or wired or that don't give them basic nutrients free from processed foods, sugars, chemical additives, and empty calories?
Just because we didn't pay attention to an area that was important back then when crap foods were served doesn't mean we shouldn't improve it now.
-
In previous times, many school districts had inhouse food service programs. My opinion is that overall the food which the school cooks actually prepared from scratch was healthier and better tasting. Locally, a few districts have gone back to inhouse food service programs. Most school districts, however, get food from the big (for profit) food service companies, such as Sodexho-Marriott. Most of their products are highly processed foods. As I mentioned, the ingredient list on their chicken nuggets would make anyone cringe. Although the nuggets taste okay, they definitely aren't just chicken. There are a lot of fillers in the product.
Most of the hot foods are shipped frozen and already prepared. Essentially, all the cooks need do is pop them in the oven to warm before serving. Breakfast foods are some of the worst of the worst. Lots of sugar loaded foods served at breakfast.
I think they should do zero processed foods and as you said, stick to whole foods cooked from scratch on site. Thinking Chic-fil-a is good for them is ignorant.
Also, getting all hateful over the fact Michelle/OB is talking about this and therefore criticizing them over it for the mere fact "its them" shows just how ignorant and inbred some of these haters are.
-
Do you think that's the whole focus in schools? Lunches? I agree our schools need much work, but why feed them food that causes them to be sluggish or wired or that don't give them basic nutrients free from processed foods, sugars, chemical additives, and empty calories?
Just because we didn't pay attention to an area that was important back then when crap foods were served doesn't mean we shouldn't improve it now.
How about the parents make the decision on what their kids eat? For fuck sake everything .gov gets involved in is completely fucked up, then 25 years down the line it becomes a big problem. Maybe you believe parents should just give up their responsibility to .gov to raise their children? Schools are to there to teach and prepare children for the real world, not to propagandize what .gov decides is "morally" right and what ever bullshit they are teaching kids, because it sure in the hell isn't anything useful for when they become adults
-
How about the parents make the decision on what their kids eat? For fuck sake everything .gov gets involved in is completely fucked up, then 25 years down the line it becomes a big problem. Maybe you believe parents should just give up their responsibility to .gov to raise their children? Schools are to there to teach and prepare children for the real world, not to propagandize what .gov decides is "morally" right and what ever bullshit they are teaching kids, because it sure in the hell isn't anything useful for when they become adults
From what i can see, Parents still do have total control to send their kids to school with whatever they want.
How does requiring schools to serve healthy food and not crappy food equate to: "Maybe you believe parents should just give up their responsibility to .gov to raise their children?"
Seems like a pretty stupid thing to think.
By that logic we can say: Allowing schools to serve greasy slop is letting the government fatten up our kids and kill them early in life.
We are only talking about setting standards on food served at school lunches NOT:
propagandize what .gov decides is "morally" right
parents should just give up their responsibility to .gov to raise their children
All that is basic "hate the dems fear propaganda"
And isn't teaching kids what healthy food is and is not by feeding healthy food at school preparing them for adulthood?
-
the fairy tales you right wingers make up and pass around are just hilarious
I have no doubt you actually believe this narrative even though you just thought it up
its a fairy tale to you that some giant food corporation is going to land a huge government contract when the US starts to subsidize lunches at all of the public schools? who do you think will provide the food?
-
And right now that huge government contract belongs to chik-fil-a, who produce crap food for the kids. Try again .
um yeah that's why they're going to give the contract to another giant corporation whose political leanings are more suited towards the Obama administration. that's the whole point of all of this.
do you say the words that you post out loud to yourself before you post them?
I find it funny how the only conspiracy theories you guys but into are the ones that happened before 2008. do you think crony capitalism died with the Bush administration? the scary thing is that I think you actually do.
-
its a fairy tale to you that some giant food corporation is going to land a huge government contract when the US starts to subsidize lunches at all of the public schools? who do you think will provide the food?
If that's the case, i wouldn't care so long as certain standards are maintained. But, if the "giant food" corp serves processed crap then i am not in favor. And don't kid yourself, if it was a repub thing, they'd give the contract to a right leaning corp.
So far is there any indication of this happening like you suspect? Or are is it just a suspicion?
I believe there are basic meals that can be served at a reasonable cost that are made from scratch at most schools. That would be the best way IMO.
But NOT doing anything about it, and continuing to allow schools to serve shit like Chic-fil-A or in most cases much worse is stupid.
-
If that's the case, i wouldn't care so long as certain standards are maintained. But, if the "giant food" corp serves processed crap then i am not in favor. And don't kid yourself, if it was a repub thing, they'd give the contract to a right leaning corp.
So far is there any indication of this happening like you suspect? Or are is it just a suspicion?
I believe there are basic meals that can be served at a reasonable cost that are made from scratch at most schools. That would be the best way IMO.
But NOT doing anything about it, and continuing to allow schools to serve shit like Chic-fil-A or in most cases much worse is stupid.
gmafb - "WE MUST ACT" !!! blah blah blah.
The govt needs to but the f out
-
gmafb - "WE MUST ACT" !!! blah blah blah.
The govt needs to but the f out
Another stupid comment. This one coming from someone who isn't a parent and obsessed with OB.
No, the government needs to be involved in this.
Props to OB for signing the law. Becuase left to you hateful inbred dumbfuck birthers, there prolly wouldn't any schools becuase the governemnt would be invovled. :D
-
From what i can see, Parents still do have total control to send their kids to school with whatever they want.
How does requiring schools to serve healthy food and not crappy food equate to: "Maybe you believe parents should just give up their responsibility to .gov to raise their children?"
Seems like a pretty stupid thing to think.
By that logic we can say: Allowing schools to serve greasy slop is letting the government fatten up our kids and kill them early in life.
We are only talking about setting standards on food served at school lunches NOT:
propagandize what .gov decides is "morally" right
parents should just give up their responsibility to .gov to raise their children
All that is basic "hate the dems fear propaganda"
And isn't teaching kids what healthy food is and is not by feeding healthy food at school preparing them for adulthood?
Yeah its all hate the dem fear propaganda ::), I guess in your world .gov = dems ::)
Yeah learning how to eat healthy is going to look great on your resume.............
-
Yeah its all hate the dem fear propaganda ::), I guess in your world .gov = dems ::)
Yeah learning how to eat healthy is going to look great on your resume.............
Now you are just going the "lets take the argument to the ridiculous" land.
All you did was regurgitate typical right wing talking points that we exposed make ZERO sense:
How does requiring schools to serve healthy food and not crappy food equate to: "Maybe you believe parents should just give up their responsibility to .gov to raise their children?"
Seems like a pretty stupid thing to think.
By that logic we can say: Allowing schools to serve greasy slop is letting the government fatten up our kids and kill them early in life.
We are only talking about setting standards on food served at school lunches NOT:
propagandize what .gov decides is "morally" right
parents should just give up their responsibility to .gov to raise their children
Hence, basic fear propaganda.
BTW: What's shows on a high school grads resume is thatr he graduated from HIGH SCHOOL.
Another stupid argument saying that eating healthy food will show on his resume. ::)
-
If that's the case, i wouldn't care so long as certain standards are maintained. But, if the "giant food" corp serves processed crap then i am not in favor. And don't kid yourself, if it was a repub thing, they'd give the contract to a right leaning corp.
So far is there any indication of this happening like you suspect? Or are is it just a suspicion?
I believe there are basic meals that can be served at a reasonable cost that are made from scratch at most schools. That would be the best way IMO.
But NOT doing anything about it, and continuing to allow schools to serve shit like Chic-fil-A or in most cases much worse is stupid.
in all honesty i'm just talking shit. but that doesn't mean i'm not right.
and I don't think its as easy as you think to provide healthy food and beat out a large food corporation that has the capital and means to produce at a low cost for the contract. so its obviously going to have to come from a large food company with a lot of capital (i.e. white grey haired rich guy)
so I can easily cry "crony capitalism" even though its impossible to provide a service like this without utilizing a large food corp. now all the liberals on this board aren't interested in accusing THEIR president of crony capitalism but they wouldn't have hesitated to accuse the President of this from 2000-2008. that's my whole point. im a smartass.
-
in all honesty i'm just talking shit. but that doesn't mean i'm not right.
and I don't think its as easy as you think to provide healthy food and beat out a large food corporation that has the capital and means to produce at a low cost for the contract. so its obviously going to have to come from a large food company with a lot of capital (i.e. white grey haired rich guy)
so I can easily cry "crony capitalism" even though its impossible to provide a service like this without utilizing a large food corp. now all the liberals on this board aren't interested in accusing THEIR president of crony capitalism but they wouldn't have hesitated to accuse the President of this from 2000-2008. that's my whole point. im a smartass.
Cool. I think you are probably right. It will need a large food corp in most areas that will cast political chips into campaigns some how. But with government regs (yes bad word), certain standards should be met.
-
Cool. I think you are probably right. It will need a large food corp in most areas that will cast political chips into campaigns some how. But with government regs (yes bad word), certain standards should be met.
I just find it hard to believe that the food they provide will be much better than any other mass produced food and still be able to keep the costs close to what they were paying before.
and what is Mrs. Obama's standard? calorie amount in a meal? that's why she thinks Chik-Fil-A is unhealthy? the new company will need to do nothing more but reduce their portion sizes and "wallah!" HEALTHIER! so instead of eating too much CRAP, they will feed the kids a little bit of CRAP. um yay?
in my opinion, this is a political move to tell Chik-Fil-A to go fuck themselves.
and if Chik-Fil-A wants to scream their political beliefs from the rooftops well they should have expected this.
-
I just find it hard to believe that the food they provide will be much better than any other mass produced food and still be able to keep the costs close to what they were paying before.
and what is Mrs. Obama's standard? calorie amount in a meal? that's why she thinks Chik-Fil-A is unhealthy? the new company will need to do nothing more but reduce their portion sizes and "wallah!" HEALTHIER! so instead of eating too much CRAP, they will feed the kids a little bit of CRAP. um yay?
in my opinion, this is a political move to tell Chik-Fil-A to go fuck themselves.
and if Chik-Fil-A wants to scream their political beliefs from the rooftops well they should have expected this.
It might be just that. Still can we agree that much of the food served is crap? Can we also agree Chic-fil-a is not healthy food? The law OB signed in 2010 might not be what's needed. I don't know, i skimmed it a bit and didn't read it in detail. I thinks its better than not doing anything about it.
I would assume it would cost more to serve healthy food made from scratch. But maybe not. I don't really know.
-
It might be just that. Still can we agree that much of the food served is crap? Can we also agree Chic-fil-a is not healthy food? The law OB signed in 2010 might not be what's needed. I don't know, i skimmed it a bit and didn't read it in detail. I thinks its better than not doing anything about it.
I would assume it would cost more to serve healthy food made from scratch. But maybe not. I don't really know.
agreed. do I think that the food will be a lot healthier if we go with some other food corp? no. not really.
like I said, they'll get some company to give the same type of food and reduce portion size and now it will be considered "healthy". just like those Weight Watchers bars that are just candy bars. but they're real small candy bars. and they call it "health food". its all marketing to the masses bullshit.
its SO EASY for them to do this. of course Chik-Fil-A is unhealthy. so they'll use that reason for getting rid of them. but we all know the real reason.
I think some people believe that these kids are going to get organic, grass fed 95% lean beef in their cheeseburgers and fresh organic fruits and vegetables handed out to them at lunch. no they won't. they'll get the same shit they've always gotten. just a little bit less.
-
Now you are just going the "lets take the argument to the ridiculous" land.
All you did was regurgitate typical right wing talking points that we exposed make ZERO sense:
Hence, basic fear propaganda.
BTW: What's shows on a high school grads resume is thatr he graduated from HIGH SCHOOL.
Another stupid argument saying that eating healthy food will show on his resume. ::)
You make no sense, always with the left right talking points bullshit.
Wait, you said learning from school how to eat properly is preparing kids for adulthood\real world - put that on your resume and see how far it gets you.
-
You make no sense, always with the left right talking points bullshit.
Wait, you said learning from school how to eat properly is preparing kids for adulthood\real world - put that on your resume and see how far it gets you.
Eating right and or learning to eat healthy doesn't help you in adulthood? ???
-
I just find it hard to believe that the food they provide will be much better than any other mass produced food and still be able to keep the costs close to what they were paying before.
and what is Mrs. Obama's standard? calorie amount in a meal? that's why she thinks Chik-Fil-A is unhealthy? the new company will need to do nothing more but reduce their portion sizes and "wallah!" HEALTHIER! so instead of eating too much CRAP, they will feed the kids a little bit of CRAP. um yay?
in my opinion, this is a political move to tell Chik-Fil-A to go fuck themselves.
and if Chik-Fil-A wants to scream their political beliefs from the rooftops well they should have expected this.
Salt is unhealthy, meat is unhealthy, fat is unhealthy and heart healthy whole grains should be emphasized
A big bowl of cheerios with low fat milk, obviously, is the healthiest thing The Childrens should be eating
-
Maybe they should try teaching them some skills that might actually be useful in the real world. No lets focus on school lunches.
I don't believe the only choices are to either focus on healthy and nutritious food in schools or on education. These subjects are not mutually exclusive. One consideration is that well nourished students have been shown to be more responsive and attentive to their education. Another consideration is in educating young people with regards making good food choices. One of the best teaching tools is teaching by example. If school cafeteria food choices are healthy ones and they taste good too, this sets a positive example which some young people aren't otherwise exposed to.
-
Salt is unhealthy, meat is unhealthy, fat is unhealthy and heart healthy whole grains should be emphasized
A big bowl of cheerios with low fat milk, obviously, is the healthiest thing The Childrens should be eating
some idiot could easily say to you, "dairy and grains are horrible for you".
that's the problem. everyone has a different definition of "healthy" in this country. and in their own minds they're all exactly right. except most of those same people are fat fucks who couldn't run a mile or do one pullup to save their life.
my wife is a registered dietitian. you should hear the stories she tells about how some parents feed their kids because of something their crossfit instructor told them. you'd laugh your ass off.
so in the end they can use whoever and serve whatever they want. will it be healthier? by someone's definition it will be.
-
Salt is unhealthy, meat is unhealthy, fat is unhealthy and heart healthy whole grains should be emphasized
A big bowl of cheerios with low fat milk, obviously, is the healthiest thing The Childrens should be eating
It was recently discovered that whole milk may actually be beneficial in losing and maintaining a healthy weight. The reason given for this is that whole milk leaves one feeling satisfied (not hungry) for a longer time then does non-fat milk. Cheerios is one of the more nutritious processed cereals. So you got that part right.
-
Salt is unhealthy, meat is unhealthy, fat is unhealthy and heart healthy whole grains should be emphasized
A big bowl of cheerios with low fat milk, obviously, is the healthiest thing The Childrens should be eating
http://www.blisstree.com/2013/09/03/food/nutrition/10-reasons-to-quit-dairy/
http://wellnessmama.com/575/how-grains-are-killing-you-slowly/
-
http://www.blisstree.com/2013/09/03/food/nutrition/10-reasons-to-quit-dairy/
http://wellnessmama.com/575/how-grains-are-killing-you-slowly/
and is any of this shit true? no. this is to create hysteria so food companies can prey on yuppies to buy their gluten free and organic products for 2 times the price. again, no REAL scientific evidence exists that supports this. but millions believe it. the FDA and USDA have done endless amounts of research on this stuff and have never found anything that proved that any of these foods are unhealthy.
here's the part where some tree hugging lib claims that the FDA and the USDA are in cahoots with large food corporations and keep information from us and give us food that they know will kill us. yet that same guy voted to have that same government have more control over our health care in 2012. yeah libs make a lot of sense.
-
some idiot could easily say to you, "dairy and grains are horrible for you".
that's the problem. everyone has a different definition of "healthy" in this country. and in their own minds they're all exactly right. except most of those same people are fat fucks who couldn't run a mile or do one pullup to save their life.
my wife is a registered dietitian. you should hear the stories she tells about how some parents feed their kids because of something their crossfit instructor told them. you'd laugh your ass off.
so in the end they can use whoever and serve whatever they want. will it be healthier? by someone's definition it will be.
As your wife surely knows, the science of nutrition is ever evolving and changing. We learn new things about what is an isn't healthy for us everyday. See my post about whole milk. This is a fairly recent finding, BTW.
My wife has type II diabetes (which is well controlled with diet and oral meds) and she suffers from chronic kidney failure. Recently she had acute kidney failure and was on dialysis for about 3 months. Considering her delicate health, her diet is more crucial to her survival than it is for most of us. After attending several classes on nutrition and diet designed primarily for kidney patients, I've come to realize how complicated eating healthy can be for some people. One thing that seems pretty obvious though is that processed foods are often much worse for us then unprocessed foods, such as fresh vegetables, whole grains and small portions of protein rich foods, such as meat and fish.
If you need proof of this, read the labels on processed foods. There is a whole lot of stuff in there the human body doesn't need, such as flavor enhancers and preservatives. The same is true for most fast foods.
-
http://www.blisstree.com/2013/09/03/food/nutrition/10-reasons-to-quit-dairy/
http://wellnessmama.com/575/how-grains-are-killing-you-slowly/
I'm with you bears. I'd love to eat a bowl of Cheerios but ya better look out for my horrible gluten shits afterwards.
Chex are pretty much the only cheap gluten-free cereal.
-
and is any of this shit true? no. this is to create hysteria so food companies can prey on yuppies to buy their gluten free and organic products for 2 times the price. again, no REAL scientific evidence exists that supports this. but millions believe it. the FDA and USDA have done endless amounts of research on this stuff and have never found anything that proved that any of these foods are unhealthy.
here's the part where some tree hugging lib claims that the FDA and the USDA are in cahoots with large food corporations and keep information from us and give us food that they know will kill us. yet that same guy voted to have that same government have more control over our health care in 2012. yeah libs make a lot of sense.
WTF? Provide me your address and I will send you some of my gluten shit and some of my regular shit so you can compare the two. For science.
-
http://www.blisstree.com/2013/09/03/food/nutrition/10-reasons-to-quit-dairy/
http://wellnessmama.com/575/how-grains-are-killing-you-slowly/
apparently my dripping sarcasm was too close to mirroring the actual stance of the Government Guardians of Public Health.
oh, I forgot to include that ''processed'' food is unhealthy too - unless you personally dug it out of your garden or caught it yourself it's dangerous to eat.
Common sense macros and keeping calories at baseline is the only thing the majority of people need to worry about, but that doesn't require government oversight or allow Whole Foods hipsters to indulge their OCD food neurosis about whatever is currently 'bad' (gluten omg)
-
http://www.blisstree.com/2013/09/03/food/nutrition/10-reasons-to-quit-dairy/
http://wellnessmama.com/575/how-grains-are-killing-you-slowly/
Interesting articles.
I believe this helps point out why diet and nutrition are so confusing for most of us. I'm not going to look for counter arguments to the claims in those articles, but I am confident there are many out there.
One thing I'd like to stress is portion control. More than any other problem, it seems, is our tendency to eat more than we need. This is not entirely our own fault. "Empty calorie" foods only satisfy our hunger for a short while. Most restaurants serve meals that are double or even triple the amount of food one needs.
-
apparently my dripping sarcasm was too close to mirroring the actual stance of the Government Guardians of Public Health.
oh, I forgot to include that ''processed'' food is unhealthy too - unless you personally dug it out of your garden or caught it yourself it's dangerous to eat.
Common sense macros and keeping calories at baseline is the only thing the majority of people need to worry about, but that doesn't require government oversight or allow Whole Foods hipsters to indulge their OCD food neurosis about whatever is currently 'bad' (gluten omg)
Are you aware that phosphorous is added to some processed foods to enhance flavor? Some phosphorous is fine, too much is harmful to our health. How do you know when you are getting too much? You don't! The reason for this is that it is often not a listed ingredient on the label.
People are gullible and easily misguided. While a few people suffer digestive issues as a result of eating gluten, this is comparatively rare. Most of us benefit from some glutens in our diet. Unfortunately, there seems to be a gluten free craze going on at present.
Another interesting fad is the organic food fad. I'm all for food that aren't genetically altered, but I don't want to eat apples with worms either.
-
Here's a little factoid about school food nutrition standards. Did you know that catsup is considered a vegetable according to the food service industry which is a mainstay of the meals served in schools?
-
Here's a little factoid about school food nutrition standards. Did you know that catsup is considered a vegetable according to the food service industry which is a mainstay of the meals served in schools?
see the standards are already fuzzy. which leads us back to my original point. doesn't matter who gets the contract. there will be a perfectly reasonable argument (to the lay person) that their food is healthier then Chik-Fil-A, even if its not.
the important part for the Obama administration is that they stop patronizing a corporation who doesn't hold their same ideals.
-
Mine and my wife's health insurance went down by about $100 a month each, since you asked.
If you say so. ::)
-
If you say so. ::)
Do you think I am lying? Really, what's with the ::)?
Last year we each had Regence MedAdvantage RX Enhanced. We each currently have Regence MedAdvantage RX Classic. With Classic our maximum out-of-pocket is $3,400 per year. With Enhanced the max out of pocket is only $2,500. The monthly premium this year for Enhanced is $178. The monthly premium for Classic is $66. The difference is actually $112 per month each. If you do the math, you'll see that even if one has high usage and maxes out, they still save money with the Classic.
Prescription drug coverage is about the same with either plan (many generic drugs cost less then the lowest co-pay).
Both Classic and Advantage are PPOs.
If you still think I am making this up, you can check with Portland, OR. Regence for their Med-Advantage pricing. I mention the location because rates vary by location. Oregon generally has higher rates then some other parts of the country.
Med-Advantage insurance is only available to people on Medicare. We each pay an additional $100 per month for Medicare.
I use an agent who specializes in Medicare plans. The agent reviews our individual needs and tries to match us up with the best insurance for our situation. This is not something which is purchased through the Affordable Health Care Act exchange, or the Oregon version thereof. It has little to do with "Obamacare" except in anyway that Obamacare might affect premium costs industry wide. I don't know that anyone has looked at this issue yet. It could be that Obamacare has made the market more competitive or less competitive. I think this remains to be seen.
-
Obama is not exactly the best spokesman here. He is always seen high, drunk, drinking beers, scarfing down ice cream, burgers dogs, etc. Same for his husband.
He sure knows how to party that Obama.
Why not try doing the same thing Soul? You cant get any worse maybe it will help you.
-
The premiums are higher for him seeing his past history of mental illness. On the bright side, they can't rule being a fag (which is way worse than being gay) as a pre existing condition anymore. Once pills come out to cure that afflictions, his insurance will be worth the extra dime or two.
LOL
-
This is funny, when I was in school you should have seen the crap they served in the lunch room. Commodity pizza, shit was so greasy people would use half a container of napkins to soak it up. Something they called hot dogs, greasy ass french fries. Cookies....... No one seemed to give a shit then, why now all of the sudden? Oh thats right it for the children ::). Maybe they should try teaching them some skills that might actually be useful in the real world. No lets focus on school lunches.
So your saying its broke but you dont want to fix it,,, because your afraid the school will forget all about teaching knowledge and only teach food recipies for students from now on?
-
This is funny, when I was in school you should have seen the crap they served in the lunch room. Commodity pizza, shit was so greasy people would use half a container of napkins to soak it up. Something they called hot dogs, greasy ass french fries. Cookies....... No one seemed to give a shit then, why now all of the sudden? Oh thats right it for the children ::). Maybe they should try teaching them some skills that might actually be useful in the real world. No lets focus on school lunches.
Knowing what foods is good for you is not useful in the real world?
What is useful in the real world in your mind?
-
um yeah that's why they're going to give the contract to another giant corporation whose political leanings are more suited towards the Obama administration. that's the whole point of all of this.
do you say the words that you post out loud to yourself before you post them?
I find it funny how the only conspiracy theories you guys but into are the ones that happened before 2008. do you think crony capitalism died with the Bush administration? the scary thing is that I think you actually do.
Sure and so what? If they produce better food its all good.
-
Yeah its all hate the dem fear propaganda ::), I guess in your world .gov = dems ::)
Yeah learning how to eat healthy is going to look great on your resume.............
Not on your resume...
But 10 years more on the gravestone is gonna look and feel great.
-
I find it interesting that this being a bodybuilding Website and that many of the supposed bodybuilders here are very concerned about their diet in order to be as competitive as possible, that you are not equally as concerned about your kids nutrition. One might suggest that diet is more important to bodybuilders than it is to the general public. And yet here we are arguing about whether it is okay for schools to feed our kids crap food. Are we that self-absorbed that we don't really give a damn what our kids are fed as long as we eat well? I don't believe it.
Truth be told, if you are a parent, one would hope it would make you absolutely crazy to know how poorly your protégés food offerings were when you sent them off to school. I want to believe that each and every one of you would pack your precious little ones lunch everyday to insure they were healthy and well fed.
If you are concerned with too much government interference in our lives, make absolutely sure that there is no reason for government intervention. Our future is with our youth. If you care about the future, you care about what happens to all young people and not just your own kids.
-
Knowing what foods is good for you is not useful in the real world?
What is useful in the real world in your mind?
Whats useful? Knowing how to read, math, science, you know all those things that are supposed to be taught. But hey knowing what food is good for you, like it takes a rocket scientist to figure that out, is more important than those other things.......... I guess it just means less competition for jobs in the future
-
Not on your resume...
But 10 years more on the gravestone is gonna look and feel great.
And you know this how? Is this another one of those .gov one size fits all initiatives?
-
I find it interesting that this being a bodybuilding Website and that many of the supposed bodybuilders here are very concerned about their diet in order to be as competitive as possible, that you are not equally as concerned about your kids nutrition. One might suggest that diet is more important to bodybuilders than it is to the general public. And yet here we are arguing about whether it is okay for schools to feed our kids crap food. Are we that self-absorbed that we don't really give a damn what our kids are fed as long as we eat well? I don't believe it.
Truth be told, if you are a parent, one would hope it would make you absolutely crazy to know how poorly your protégés food offerings were when you sent them off to school. I want to believe that each and every one of you would pack your precious little ones lunch everyday to insure they were healthy and well fed.
If you are concerned with too much government interference in our lives, make absolutely sure that there is no reason for government intervention. Our future is with our youth. If you care about the future, you care about what happens to all young people and not just your own kids.
I hear you on that. my problem is that I'm not crazy about my taxes rising and HOPING that the government actually implements a plan that successfully carries out its intended purpose. what if they subsidize lunches, the food isn't much better because all they do is give the kids the same food but in smaller portions and i'm paying more taxes than I was before?
-
I find it interesting that this being a bodybuilding Website and that many of the supposed bodybuilders here are very concerned about their diet in order to be as competitive as possible, that you are not equally as concerned about your kids nutrition. One might suggest that diet is more important to bodybuilders than it is to the general public. And yet here we are arguing about whether it is okay for schools to feed our kids crap food. Are we that self-absorbed that we don't really give a damn what our kids are fed as long as we eat well? I don't believe it.
Truth be told, if you are a parent, one would hope it would make you absolutely crazy to know how poorly your protégés food offerings were when you sent them off to school. I want to believe that each and every one of you would pack your precious little ones lunch everyday to insure they were healthy and well fed.
If you are concerned with too much government interference in our lives, make absolutely sure that there is no reason for government intervention. Our future is with our youth. If you care about the future, you care about what happens to all young people and not just your own kids.
That's just it - there IS NO REASON for it!
I really feel sorry for you people who think govt knows what's best for not only yourselves, but for everyone else as well.
-
"the government knows best" is an over used talking point. If they set good lines, then good, if they don't then its not. Simple.
If they allow crap foods, then its not a good law.
NOT allowing Chic-fil-a is a no brainer.
-
I find it interesting that this being a bodybuilding Website and that many of the supposed bodybuilders here are very concerned about their diet in order to be as competitive as possible, that you are not equally as concerned about your kids nutrition. One might suggest that diet is more important to bodybuilders than it is to the general public. And yet here we are arguing about whether it is okay for schools to feed our kids crap food. Are we that self-absorbed that we don't really give a damn what our kids are fed as long as we eat well? I don't believe it.
Truth be told, if you are a parent, one would hope it would make you absolutely crazy to know how poorly your protégés food offerings were when you sent them off to school. I want to believe that each and every one of you would pack your precious little ones lunch everyday to insure they were healthy and well fed.
If you are concerned with too much government interference in our lives, make absolutely sure that there is no reason for government intervention. Our future is with our youth. If you care about the future, you care about what happens to all young people and not just your own kids.
I am concerned about my kid's nutrition, which is why they bring lunch to school. I'm also concerned that some dumbfuck government official is going to be able to decide whether or not my lunch choice is nutritious or not. My wife's best friend is a nutritionist. I'm almost certain she's retarded. She's also fat and had no idea that alcohol contained calories. My wife and I both have graduate degrees--she's a doctor (who also happens to be thin and knows that alcohol contains 7 calories per gram). I'd prefer my children eat what she packs in their lunch, not what her dumbfuck nutritionist friend thinks they should pack.
-
I am concerned about my kid's nutrition, which is why they bring lunch to school. I'm also concerned that some dumbfuck government official is going to be able to decide whether or not my lunch choice is nutritious or not. My wife's best friend is a nutritionist. I'm almost certain she's retarded. She's also fat and had no idea that alcohol contained calories. My wife and I both have graduate degrees--she's a doctor (who also happens to be thin and knows that alcohol contains 7 calories per gram). I'd prefer my children eat what she packs in their lunch, not what her dumbfuck nutritionist friend thinks they should pack.
You shouldn't base your opinion of all nutritionists on this one person you mention. Surely there are nutritionists who are knowledgeable about good nutrition. I know some people with graduate degrees who are very dense and illogical. I would go so far as to say all people with graduate degrees are dense and illogical because of this. No doubt there are some "dumb fuck" government officials. Again, not all folks in government fit that profile.
I am all for packing a lunch as opposed to eating food you have no idea about where it came from, what it contains or whether it is highly processed. I doubt our freedom is in danger of being eroded to the point that government will dictate what foods you can and can't pack in your kid's lunch as long as those foods are not illegal substances.
-
You shouldn't base your opinion of all nutritionists on this one person you mention. Surely there are nutritionists who are knowledgeable about good nutrition. I know some people with graduate degrees who are very dense and illogical. I would go so far as to say all people with graduate degrees are dense and illogical because of this. No doubt there are some "dumb fuck" government officials. Again, not all folks in government fit that profile.
I am all for packing a lunch as opposed to eating food you have no idea about where it came from, what it contains or whether it is highly processed. I doubt our freedom is in danger of being eroded to the point that government will dictate what foods you can and can't pack in your kid's lunch as long as those foods are not illegal substances.
The point is that I pack my children a nutritious lunch and have no desire to have a school official decide whether or not it meets their criteria for a proper lunch.
An analogy would be a basic generalized strength training routine for a high school football team. The program has to be basic and general enough so that a hundred players of different athletic levels can all follow the routine. There are always highly motivated kids who are training on their own and using a more advanced routine. If the coach forces them to follow the team routine, they will progress less than if they used the more advanced routine....so you end up limiting those players in order for the lazy unmotivated players to be able to keep up with the one basic routine.
That's what always happens with government programs.
My kids may end up with a less nutritious lunch in order to meet the "general guidelines" so that the kids who's parents don't feed them properly will have a more nutritious lunch.
-
"the government knows best" is an over used talking point. If they set good lines, then good, if they don't then its not. Simple.
If they allow crap foods, then its not a good law.
NOT allowing Chic-fil-a is a no brainer.
I only need three micronutrients. Vitamin U, S, and A.
-
The point is that I pack my children a nutritious lunch and have no desire to have a school official decide whether or not it meets their criteria for a proper lunch.
An analogy would be a basic generalized strength training routine for a high school football team. The program has to be basic and general enough so that a hundred players of different athletic levels can all follow the routine. There are always highly motivated kids who are training on their own and using a more advanced routine. If the coach forces them to follow the team routine, they will progress less than if they used the more advanced routine....so you end up limiting those players in order for the lazy unmotivated players to be able to keep up with the one basic routine.
That's what always happens with government programs.
My kids may end up with a less nutritious lunch in order to meet the "general guidelines" so that the kids who's parents don't feed them properly will have a more nutritious lunch.
I understand your fears. I think in this case they are off base and a little over thought. If you are concerned about what your children are given to eat in school food programs, send them off to school with foods you've prepared for them.
-
Whats useful? Knowing how to read, math, science, you know all those things that are supposed to be taught. But hey knowing what food is good for you, like it takes a rocket scientist to figure that out, is more important than those other things.......... I guess it just means less competition for jobs in the future
So if they serve healthy food at school lunch they for some reason cant teach you to read do matc etc..?
I dont see the connection
-
And you know this how? Is this another one of those .gov one size fits all initiatives?
How i know you are gonna live longer with a healthy lifestyle?
Is this a serious question?
-
"the government knows best" is an over used talking point. If they set good lines, then good, if they don't then its not. Simple.
If they allow crap foods, then its not a good law.
NOT allowing Chic-fil-a is a no brainer.
+1
-
Sure and so what? If they produce better food its all good.
the problem I have is that you're convinced they will. and i'm fairly certain they won't. may I remind you that you seem to believe strongly that Chik-Fil-A is very unhealthy. and that was their FIRST choice. so you're going to allow the same people that made that choice to make another choice that will most probably be more expensive. and you have undying faith in these same decision makers.
who are they putting in charge of this? Mrs. Obama. she's not qualified.
remember Bigger Faster Stronger when they met Henry Waxman, who was in charge of the fight against anabolic steroids? he didn't even know what steroids were. this is what we're going to inevitably pay out more tax dollars for.
I guess I just don't know why you have so much faith that the government is going to feed our kids better and why you're so willing to pay more tax dollars out of your hard earned money to let THEM do this. I think the money is better spent getting information out to parents, educating people and encouraging parents to feed their children better.
i'm curious to know that if the Bush administration was doing the same thing would you be so supportive? even if one of GWB's buddies who owned a food corp landed the contract?
-
i'm curious to know that if the Bush administration was doing the same thing would you be so supportive? even if one of GWB's buddies who owned a food corp landed the contract?
HEHHEEHE!!
That libtard moron that you responded to would have posted 8409238340284028 threads attacking Bush.
All the liberal idiots on this board attacked Bush for overstepping his authority but they applaud and continue to support theclowninthewhitehouse for doing the same thing and in some cases doing much worse.
-
I love how the statists keep crying how the government 'has' to step in to give the kids 'free' (lol) 'healthy' (lol) government contractor supplied lunches.. when the parents of the kids on free meals are getting EBT and other taxpayers money that's supposed to be used to provide for the kids they keep spitting out.
God forbid they use some of their beer, cable, lotto ticket and Kools money to buy a loaf of bread, some sliced ham and cheese and an apple to put in their kids lunch box. I know ham is high is the evil republican mineral sodium, which is the equivalent of feeding kids arsenic ::) but sometimes you gotta make do.
-
the problem I have is that you're convinced they will. and i'm fairly certain they won't. may I remind you that you seem to believe strongly that Chik-Fil-A is very unhealthy. and that was their FIRST choice. so you're going to allow the same people that made that choice to make another choice that will most probably be more expensive. and you have undying faith in these same decision makers.
who are they putting in charge of this? Mrs. Obama. she's not qualified.
remember Bigger Faster Stronger when they met Henry Waxman, who was in charge of the fight against anabolic steroids? he didn't even know what steroids were. this is what we're going to inevitably pay out more tax dollars for.
I guess I just don't know why you have so much faith that the government is going to feed our kids better and why you're so willing to pay more tax dollars out of your hard earned money to let THEM do this. I think the money is better spent getting information out to parents, educating people and encouraging parents to feed their children better.
i'm curious to know that if the Bush administration was doing the same thing would you be so supportive? even if one of GWB's buddies who owned a food corp landed the contract?
Public education is a branch of state government and also must comply with federal laws regarding education. Essentially every decision made about what food is served or not served in schools is therefore a government decision.
-
http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/the-government-is-cracking-down-on-school-bake-sales-20140725
>:(
-
http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/the-government-is-cracking-down-on-school-bake-sales-20140725
>:(
-Interesting article. State government pushing back at a federal law. Did you know that some states have legalized marijuana even for recreational use? Marijuana is still illegal under federal law.
-
-Interesting article. State government pushing back at a federal law. Did you know that some states have legalized marijuana even for recreational use? Marijuana is still illegal under federal law.
according to liberals - ban cupcakes legalize drugs
makes sense eh?
-
according to liberals - ban cupcakes legalize drugs
makes sense eh?
Huh? How do you get that from what I posted? My post exampled the fact that state and federal laws are often in disagreement. There are liberal and conservative law makers in both federal and state government.
Did you even read the article you linked in your post beyond just the title of it? The article is about states rejecting the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act.
-
Huh? How do you get that from what I posted? My post exampled the fact that state and federal laws are often in disagreement. There are liberal and conservative law makers in both federal and state government.
Did you even read the article you linked in your post beyond just the title of it? The article is about states rejecting the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act.
Was just being a dick in general.
-
True Adonis, GET IN HERE!!
-
Public education is a branch of state government and also must comply with federal laws regarding education. Essentially every decision made about what food is served or not served in schools is therefore a government decision.
yup. and Chik-Fil-A is a corporation run by conservative republicans. is that why they're being ousted? I don't know for sure. what I do know is if they are actually replaced by a food corporation that serves healthier food for the same price i'll be very surprised.
and i'm quite certain they won't be replaced by another American food corporation whose stockholders are against gay marriage and abortion.
-
So if they serve healthy food at school lunch they for some reason cant teach you to read do matc etc..?
I dont see the connection
Maybe you should look in the mirror, it will give a clue to the kind of retards that are being turned by the school system
-
How i know you are gonna live longer with a healthy lifestyle?
Is this a serious question?
Complete horse shit, how long you live is based on genetics plain and simple.
-
Complete horse shit, how long you live is based on genetics plain and simple.
It should be so simple. Lifestyle choices also affect your lifespan.
If you are right, then Getbiggers are in for the long haul with me because genetically speaking longevity is commonplace in my family.
-
"the government knows best" is an over used talking point. If they set good lines, then good, if they don't then its not. Simple.
If they allow crap foods, then its not a good law.
NOT allowing Chic-fil-a is a no brainer.
It's overused by implication (if not outright) by those of you who actually believe it.
Who decides what's good and what's crap?
How about you just not eat there?
I don't even eat it - it's "crap" in my subjective opinion. But I don't have the right to tell others they can't eat it.
What about cigarettes? Booze? OTC pain meds that wreck internal organs? Why not crusade against that stuff?
-
It's overused by implication (if not outright) by those of you who actually believe it.
Who decides what's good and what's crap?
How about you just not eat there?
I don't even eat it - it's "crap" in my subjective opinion. But I don't have the right to tell others they can't eat it.
What about cigarettes? Booze? OTC pain meds that wreck internal organs? Why not crusade against that stuff?
I don't think anyone is suggesting Chick-Fil-A should be off limits to adults who can make up there own minds with regards to what they eat. The issue with Chick-Fil-A is that it was being served to kids in school as part of a school lunch program. Since most kids don't know or care about good nutrition, they are more susceptible to unhealthy food choices. From what I read, Chick-Fil-A was giving the schools kickbacks for selling their products which helped offset the cost of field trips. This is why that particular school district Superintendent is upset about the comments made regarding Chick-Fil-A being unhealthy food.
As a parent, I would hope the Superintendent of the school district my kids go to would be more concerned about the quality of food the district served my kids then in accepting bribes from some fast food company to help cover the cost of field trips.
-
lol @ what this argument has become.
If you don't support letting school kids eat as much fast food as they want in the school cafeteria, you hate freedom.
-
lol @ what this argument has become.
If you don't support letting school kids eat as much fast food as they want in the school cafeteria, you hate freedom.
Making choices for yourself is the only real freedom anyone really has in this country anymore.
-
lol @ what this argument has become.
If you don't support letting school kids eat as much fast food as they want in the school cafeteria, you hate freedom.
Communism sucks.
-
Communism sucks.
Lets take it a step further. In the 1990's I worked at on of the district's high schools. The students had a smoking area out under a covered porch. Smoking has been banned in school for decades. I say that is a violation of our kid's freedom. Heck even the adults can't smoke at school any longer. The government has no business banning smoking if the kids wish to do it. Makes no difference if it's supposedly bad for them.
Why should young folks have to wait until they are 21 to drink alcohol legally? Some start drinking sooner then allowed under law. In Germany, it is primarily up to parents to decide if their kids can have a drink. Do that here and the parents go to jail. I say lift the ban on underage drinking, give young folks back their freedom.
No doubt some high school kids are using steroids. What's with banning them anyway? If you want to get buff the easy way and risk dying young, why should the government interfere?
Another gripe of mine is seat belts. Not only do kids have to wear them, so does everyone else, except maybe the cops. They didn't even have seat belts when I was a kid....couldn't have worn one if I wanted. I enjoyed riding around in my parents convertible with the top down, wind blowing through my hair and the thrill of maybe getting tossed out of the car really made the ride thrilling. Damn government interference!
-
Complete horse shit, how long you live is based on genetics plain and simple.
Nasser's family probably doesn't think this. :(
-
Lets take it a step further. In the 1990's I worked at on of the district's high schools. The students had a smoking area out under a covered porch. Smoking has been banned in school for decades. I say that is a violation of our kid's freedom. Heck even the adults can't smoke at school any longer. The government has no business banning smoking if the kids wish to do it. Makes no difference if it's supposedly bad for them.
Why should young folks have to wait until they are 21 to drink alcohol legally? Some start drinking sooner then allowed under law. In Germany, it is primarily up to parents to decide if their kids can have a drink. Do that here and the parents go to jail. I say lift the ban on underage drinking, give young folks back their freedom.
No doubt some high school kids are using steroids. What's with banning them anyway? If you want to get buff the easy way and risk dying young, why should the government interfere?
Another gripe of mine is seat belts. Not only do kids have to wear them, so does everyone else, except maybe the cops. They didn't even have seat belts when I was a kid....couldn't have worn one if I wanted. I enjoyed riding around in my parents convertible with the top down, wind blowing through my hair and the thrill of maybe getting tossed out of the car really made the ride thrilling. Damn government interference!
Your family had a convertible?
Not my family. For us to get that wind through the hair feeling us kids would need to get a ride in the back of my uncle's pickup truck. And seatbelts? Hell, there weren't even seats.
-
it's a free school - kids should STFU and follow the rules. WTF is going on here. Next we'll have repubs crying because liberal school administrators ban kids from using their ipads to watch porn during study hall.
IMO, we'll see a HUGE shift in 2024 or 2028 or whenever repubs finally nominate a true CONSERVATIVE that actually wins. Suddenly, people will stop arguing with common sense school measures just because the presiden'ts middle name is hussein.
Really, step back... schools will give a kid an add'l lunch if their lunch consists of 20 pixie sticks. And people are outraged at it. Remember, obama has doubled our debt, ,assfccked us with obamacare, and THIS is what you're crying about. Really think about it - how dare schools give our kids fruit and milk to go with the jerky and mountain dew we packed. Really... schools exist to teach kids to be capable of functioning as adults. Read, write, communicate, follow rules and yes, take care of your body so you're not a diabetic with a cane on meds and disability by age 25. But no no no...
-
it's a free school - kids should STFU and follow the rules. WTF is going on here. Next we'll have repubs crying because liberal school administrators ban kids from using their ipads to watch porn during study hall.
IMO, we'll see a HUGE shift in 2024 or 2028 or whenever repubs finally nominate a true CONSERVATIVE that actually wins. Suddenly, people will stop arguing with common sense school measures just because the presiden'ts middle name is hussein.
Really, step back... schools will give a kid an add'l lunch if their lunch consists of 20 pixie sticks. And people are outraged at it. Remember, obama has doubled our debt, ,assfccked us with obamacare, and THIS is what you're crying about. Really think about it - how dare schools give our kids fruit and milk to go with the jerky and mountain dew we packed. Really... schools exist to teach kids to be capable of functioning as adults. Read, write, communicate, follow rules and yes, take care of your body so you're not a diabetic with a cane on meds and disability by age 25. But no no no...
Nothing new here.
-
Nasser's family probably doesn't think this. :(
Why? Who's to say he wouldn't have kicked off at the same age if he didn't inject his body with all sorts of chemicals? Maybe he actually lived longer because he worked out.
-
Why? Who's to say he wouldn't have kicked off at the same age if he didn't inject his body with all sorts of chemicals? Maybe he actually lived longer because he worked out.
I doubt it but that's a cool thought -- I wonder if I can get my wife to buy the idea, lol.
-
The thread about Chic-Fil-A goes to 8 pages while we ignore the other important threads. :D
-
the problem I have is that you're convinced they will. and i'm fairly certain they won't.
may I remind you that you seem to believe strongly that Chik-Fil-A is very unhealthy. and that was their FIRST choice. so you're going to allow the same people that made that choice to make another choice that will most probably be more expensive. and you have undying faith in these same decision makers.
who are they putting in charge of this? Mrs. Obama. she's not qualified.
remember Bigger Faster Stronger when they met Henry Waxman, who was in charge of the fight against anabolic steroids? he didn't even know what steroids were. this is what we're going to inevitably pay out more tax dollars for.
I guess I just don't know why you have so much faith that the government is going to feed our kids better and why you're so willing to pay more tax dollars out of your hard earned money to let THEM do this. I think the money is better spent getting information out to parents, educating people and encouraging parents to feed their children better.
i'm curious to know that if the Bush administration was doing the same thing would you be so supportive? even if one of GWB's buddies who owned a food corp landed the contract?
Im not convinced of anything but if the current supplier (chik-a) is a crap someone else deserve a shot. Free market bla bla..
Im curious why do you have such little faith in your government and so high faith in Chik-afila? You think the government is run by demons and all coorporations is run by angels?
-
the problem I have is that you're convinced they will. and i'm fairly certain they won't. may I remind you that you seem to believe strongly that Chik-Fil-A is very unhealthy. and that was their FIRST choice. so you're going to allow the same people that made that choice to make another choice that will most probably be more expensive. and you have undying faith in these same decision makers.
who are they putting in charge of this? Mrs. Obama. she's not qualified.
remember Bigger Faster Stronger when they met Henry Waxman, who was in charge of the fight against anabolic steroids? he didn't even know what steroids were. this is what we're going to inevitably pay out more tax dollars for.
I guess I just don't know why you have so much faith that the government is going to feed our kids better and why you're so willing to pay more tax dollars out of your hard earned money to let THEM do this. I think the money is better spent getting information out to parents, educating people and encouraging parents to feed their children better.
i'm curious to know that if the Bush administration was doing the same thing would you be so supportive? even if one of GWB's buddies who owned a food corp landed the contract?
If they did a better job than Chik-a i would't care if they gave the contract to the most rightwing republican nut they could find.
-
Complete horse shit, how long you live is based on genetics plain and simple.
So you are saying if 2 people of "equal" genetics lived their lives one eating Mcdonalds every day and the other eatng a balanced diet they would live to be the same age?
-
Making choices for yourself is the only real freedom anyone really has in this country anymore.
And the fight you choose is fighting for Chik-a to make the kids crap food.
A little sad, no?
-
Maybe you should look in the mirror, it will give a clue to the kind of retards that are being turned by the school system
Man i look good
-
So you are saying if 2 people of "equal" genetics lived their lives one eating Mcdonalds every day and the other eatng a balanced diet they would live to be the same age?
Entirely possible
-
And the fight you choose is fighting for Chik-a to make the kids crap food.
A little sad, no?
Has nothing to do with chik-fil-a, has to do with a government run amok, thinking they have the right to tell people what to eat. I'm sure you will start with the healthcare rap, and I will answer why is the government involved in health care in the first place?
-
So you are saying if 2 people of "equal" genetics lived their lives one eating Mcdonalds every day and the other eatng a balanced diet they would live to be the same age?
it's possible. it's possible McDieter would live longer, if he was smiling and happy and eating fairly clean, and the healthy dude was stressed as shit measuring every gram.
IMO, it all comes down to
1) genetics
2) stress
3) luck - breaking leg, falls, eating bad shellfish
4) lifestyle choices
A smoker with good genetics who laughs all day and never breaks anything big will outlive the vegan.
-
Though I confess that this is one of those long zombie threads that really seems like it should have died about 5 pages ago, I'm gonna continue it:
FWIW, today in the gated parking lot of the local public high school (which is apparently being made ready for kids coming back to school soon) here in Riverside County, CA, I saw an 18-wheeler with a huge In-N-Out Burger trailer. I can't say for sure that they were unloading product for the school (I was only there long enough to wait for my traffic light to turn green) but the back door of the trailer was open...
-
Has nothing to do with chik-fil-a, has to do with a government run amok, thinking they have the right to tell people what to eat. I'm sure you will start with the healthcare rap, and I will answer why is the government involved in health care in the first place?
Government wanting healthy food served for kids at schools is government run amaok? Wow..
Is government making standards for the purity of your water also government run amok?
-
Entirely possible
They should have taught you about food in school Kazan.
Ever heard of obesity? its quite the killer you know.
-
Government wanting healthy food served for kids at schools is government run amaok? Wow..
Is government making standards for the purity of your water also government run amok?
Hey if you want .gov telling you what to eat, where to work, how to live. Move to China.
-
They should have taught you about food in school Kazan.
Ever heard of obesity? its quite the killer you know.
They should have taught you that sitting on your ass playing Xbox or texting on your fucking phone all day is the reason people are obese. They get no fucking exercise. When I was a kid we were up from the crack of dawn til dusk playing sports riding bikes..... not sitting on our asses, and guess what obesity wasn't a problem.
-
Im not convinced of anything but if the current supplier (chik-a) is a crap someone else deserve a shot. Free market bla bla..
Im curious why do you have such little faith in your government and so high faith in Chik-afila? You think the government is run by demons and all coorporations is run by angels?
who says I have "high faith in "Chik-Fil-A"? i've never even eaten there. i'm sure its just like all other fast food places.
and yes i have very little faith in the government to provide services like these. you should too. i'm sure you didn't have this faith from 2000-2008. but now you do?
-
Hey if you want .gov telling you what to eat, where to work, how to live. Move to China.
So you think its wrong that .gov sets standards for the purity of the water you drink?
-
So you think its wrong that .gov sets standards for the purity of the water you drink?
Yes. Side note - ofagget drinks oe and colt 45 w his chooms for breakfast
-
So you think its wrong that .gov sets standards for the purity of the water you drink?
I wonder how anyone survived before all these .gov standards were put in place?
-
who says I have "high faith in "Chik-Fil-A"? i've never even eaten there. i'm sure its just like all other fast food places.
and yes i have very little faith in the government to provide services like these. you should too. i'm sure you didn't have this faith from 2000-2008. but now you do?
Plus, if a corporation or company sucks, you can take your business elsewhere. You can't do that with the government, which is why so many libs want them running so much stuff.
-
Plus, if a corporation or company sucks, you can take your business elsewhere. You can't do that with the government, which is why so many libs want them running so much stuff.
Let's not get side tracked talking about who we would have supported when and where, and not get side tracked talking about something that isn't happening.
I don't think we are talking about having the government provide the food, nor is there any program enacted or proposed for a vote saying that.
I think its important that the government set standards on what can and can not be served at public schools. I am not sure that this law signed in 2010 does what's needed to make sure healthy foods (with in reason) are served at public schools. What ever these standards are they need to be realistic and reasonable, otherwise I am against it. Things like just reducing portion size or re categorizing crappy foods as healthy I am certainly against.
But can we agree that much of what's served now isn't healthy and chic-fil-a is definitely NOT healthy?
-
Who the F cares if its unhealthy or not?
Most of the shit Ofagget is seen eating on TV is unhealthy yet no one is suggesting he no longer eat dogs, burgers beers ice cream cakes etc right?
Its called F R E E D O M -
Let's not get side tracked talking about who we would have supported when and where, and not get side tracked talking about something that isn't happening.
I don't think we are talking about having the government provide the food, nor is there any program enacted or proposed for a vote saying that.
I think its important that the government set standards on what can and can not be served at public schools. I am not sure that this law signed in 2010 does what's needed to make sure healthy foods (with in reason) are served at public schools. What ever these standards are they need to be realistic and reasonable, otherwise I am against it. Things like just reducing portion size or re categorizing crappy foods as healthy I am certainly against.
But can we agree that much of what's served now isn't healthy and chic-fil-a is definitely NOT healthy?
-
Who the F cares if its unhealthy or not?
Most of the shit Ofagget is seen eating on TV is unhealthy yet no one is suggesting he no longer eat dogs, burgers beers ice cream cakes etc right?
Its called F R E E D O M -
It's not ab out OB dumbass. Unlike you, everything in the world is NOT about OB. ::)
Left up to you conservative pussies we wouldn't even have public schools. It would be a country of inbred uneducated FAT cry baby hill billies. But at least you'd have F R E E D O M to go along with dirt roads and shanty shacks.
-
It's not ab out OB dumbass. Unlike you, everything in the world is NOT about OB. ::)
Left up to you conservative pussies we wouldn't even have public schools. It would be a country of inbred uneducated FAT cry baby hill billies. But at least you'd have F R E E D O M to go along with dirt roads and shanty shacks.
Um - the thread is about FAILURE in Chief declaring war on Chic a Filet no?
-
Um - the thread is about FAILURE in Chief declaring war on Chic a Filet no?
That's one of the discussions the thread started with yes. Did it stay on that exact subject on every page or did it evolve in to other discussions?
-
It's not ab out OB dumbass. Unlike you, everything in the world is NOT about OB. ::)
Left up to you conservative pussies we wouldn't even have public schools. It would be a country of inbred uneducated FAT cry baby hill billies. But at least you'd have F R E E D O M to go along with dirt roads and shanty shacks.
Yeah sure nothing but dirt roads, shacks, and polution ::)
-
Yeah sure nothing but dirt roads, shacks, and polution ::)
Left to the extreme right? Nothing is good when left to any extreme position, left of right.
-
Yes. Side note - ofagget drinks oe and colt 45 w his chooms for breakfast
you should be concerned about the purity of water; then again, you can't even open the top off of a bottle of water.
-
Left to the extreme right? Nothing is good when left to any extreme position, left of right.
There is a point when .gov surpasses providing for the common good. That point comes when every thing that gets presented as a possible health danger becomes fair game for .gov to step in.
Why are cigarettes legal? Because of the huge amount of tax that is collected
Why is booze legal? Because of the huge amount of tax that is collected ( not to mention they tried once and the Mob met the demand)
See a pattern here, if .gov can tax anything and make huge revenue, well fuck your health............
-
There is a point when .gov surpasses providing for the common good. That point comes when every thing that gets presented as a possible health danger becomes fair game for .gov to step in.
I agree.
Why are cigarettes legal? Because of the huge amount of tax that is collected
Why is booze legal? Because of the huge amount of tax that is collected ( not to mention they tried once and the Mob met the demand)
I think there is more to it than a simplistic reason (tax dollars) for those things to be legal.
See a pattern here, if .gov can tax anything and make huge revenue, well fuck your health............
I think you are applying incorrect association. Otherwise, why isn't meth legal?
Point is there is more to it than that concerning those things you listed.
But back the original discussion.....
We aren't talking about the "government providing" we are talking about having a standard for the food served in public schools.
the extreme righties would still have the F R E E D O M to choose a private school build on dirt roads that serves twinkees if they want and parents will still have the F R E E D O M TO send their kids to school with twinkies.
-
I agree.
I think there is more to it than a simplistic reason (tax dollars) for those things to be legal.
I think you are applying incorrect association. Otherwise, why isn't meth legal?
Point is there is more to it than that concerning those things you listed.
But back the original discussion.....
We aren't talking about the "government providing" we are talking about having a standard for the food served in public schools.
the extreme righties would still have the F R E E D O M to choose a private school build on dirt roads that serves twinkees if they want and parents will still have the F R E E D O M TO send their kids to school with twinkies.
LOL the standards .gov sets, ketchup is a vegetable...........
And the far left would spend more and more time of PC crap, and never mind about actually preparing kids for the real world.
-
LOL the standards .gov sets, ketchup is a vegetable...........
And the far left would spend more and more time of PC crap, and never mind about actually preparing kids for the real world.
I know. That's what some of the problems are for sure.
The question is, are those the standards in that 2010 law?
If so, they need to be changed.
the point is, a standard needs to be set. NOT ANY STANDARD.
-
I know. That's what some of the problems are for sure.
The question is, are those the standards in that 2010 law?
If so, they need to be changed.
the point is, a standard needs to be set. NOT ANY STANDARD.
And you trust the assholes in DC to set the standards?
-
And you trust the assholes in DC to set the standards?
No.
-
Hey if you want .gov telling you what to eat, where to work, how to live. Move to China.
Why is it that some people believe they must go over-the-top to try and prove their point?
Michelle Obama is the First Lady which is mainly just a figurehead position. She does not have the ability to make government policy or pass laws. Whatever she says, is therefore just her opinion. If she believes fast food is unhealthy, she's entitled to say so, just as you and I are. The only difference is more people will pay attention to what she says than what any of us say because we aren't in the public eye.
-
Who the F cares if its unhealthy or not?
Most of the shit Ofagget is seen eating on TV is unhealthy yet no one is suggesting he no longer eat dogs, burgers beers ice cream cakes etc right?
Its called F R E E D O M -
What President Obama eats is not relevant to anything. Do you never eat foods which aren't healthy? Do you believe it is good to make healthy food choices? Who knows, maybe you don't.
I know what foods are healthy and which ones aren't. If someone asks me about diet and nutrition, I am happy to share what I know with them. This doesn't mean I always make healthy nutritional choices myself.
-
Why is it that some people believe they must go over-the-top to try and prove their point?
Michelle Obama is the First Lady which is mainly just a figurehead position. She does not have the ability to make government policy or pass laws. Whatever she says, is therefore just her opinion. If she believes fast food is unhealthy, she's entitled to say so, just as you and I are. The only difference is more people will pay attention to what she says than what any of us say because we aren't in the public eye.
BS - there is laws and rules now - hence the school districts revolt against the guidelines tied to federal $.
F michelle Obama and her pos husband - those two losers need to go back wherever African hut they came from and leave us alone. Those two commies want tyranny and dictatorship - let them go live w Mugabe or Kim Sun or whoever.
-
Let's not get side tracked talking about who we would have supported when and where, and not get side tracked talking about something that isn't happening.
I don't think we are talking about having the government provide the food, nor is there any program enacted or proposed for a vote saying that.
I think its important that the government set standards on what can and can not be served at public schools. I am not sure that this law signed in 2010 does what's needed to make sure healthy foods (with in reason) are served at public schools. What ever these standards are they need to be realistic and reasonable, otherwise I am against it. Things like just reducing portion size or re categorizing crappy foods as healthy I am certainly against.
But can we agree that much of what's served now isn't healthy and chic-fil-a is definitely NOT healthy?
Agree with the former, not necessarily with the latter. Chic-Fil-A's food is just fine, when eaten occasionally as designed. It ain't supposed to be the cornerstone of your diet. Besides, the "least healthy" of their items would be their fried chicken sandwich. But even it is fried in peanut oil, I believe. They stopped the trans fat stuff long before doing so became en vogue.
I'd take Chic-Fil-A over Mickey D's and Burger King all day. Plus, the lemonade (actual real lemonade) is fantastic.
-
Why is it that some people believe they must go over-the-top to try and prove their point?
Michelle Obama is the First Lady which is mainly just a figurehead position. She does not have the ability to make government policy or pass laws. Whatever she says, is therefore just her opinion. If she believes fast food is unhealthy, she's entitled to say so, just as you and I are. The only difference is more people will pay attention to what she says than what any of us say because we aren't in the public eye.
How am I going over the top, some here seem to think .gov really gives a shit about them. That all this nonsense is for their own good, well because there to fucking stupid to make a decision for themselves. It's all typical elitist bullshit, do as I say not as I do, just remember its the thought that counts ::)
-
How am I going over the top, some here seem to think .gov really gives a shit about them. That all this nonsense is for their own good, well because there to fucking stupid to make a decision for themselves. It's all typical elitist bullshit, do as I say not as I do, just remember its the thought that counts ::)
I think you know very well when you go over-the-top by stretching reality to drive home the point you are hoping to make. You don't need me to show you when this is. You are a smart fellow, quit pretending otherwise.
I for one don't think most politicians give a rip about me personally except when I might contribute to their campaign of offer my endorsement. What is more, some politicians have such short memories that they will violate their campaign promises one day and then turn around and ask for an endorsement the next. Oregon's governor is doing this with me and an organization where I am the board chair as we speak. I couldn't believe he'd have the nerve to ask to meet with us to discuss endorsing him and, no doubt, contribute to his campaign with our folks dollars. Then I remembered, he's just a politician after all....nothing special about that. Whether I vote for him or not is another story. This depends on his competition.
-
I wonder how anyone survived before all these .gov standards were put in place?
http://demog.berkeley.edu/~andrew/1918/figure2.html
-
Plus, if a corporation or company sucks, you can take your business elsewhere.
Ehh thats what they are doing so...
You can't do that with the government, which is why so many libs want them running so much stuff.
-
who says I have "high faith in "Chik-Fil-A"? i've never even eaten there. i'm sure its just like all other fast food places.
and yes i have very little faith in the government to provide services like these. you should too. i'm sure you didn't have this faith from 2000-2008. but now you do?
If Bush wanted to change the food deliverer to someone who might make better food, why do you asume i would have a problem with that?
-
In 2013 the U.S. life expectancy ranked 35th of all the countries in the world. Males ranked 38th at 77.4 years while female life expectancy in the U.S. was 82.2 years.