The Troll Presidency Takes Another Pointlessly Cruel Action , Trump has turned the U.S. government into a cult of grievance.

  
Via:  john-russell  •  one month ago  •  129 comments

The Troll Presidency Takes Another Pointlessly Cruel Action  ,  Trump has turned the U.S. government into a cult of grievance.
The Trump Administration decided to roll back the amount of fruits and vegetables given to school children. This is obviously terrible, so why do it? Well, because it was a Michelle Obama initiative, that’s why. Why do it now? It was Michelle Obama’s birthday.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


The Troll Presidency Takes Another Pointlessly Cruel Action


Trump has turned the U.S. government into a cult of grievance.



49328584106_cd3e9d2e2f_o.jpg

The Trump Administration decided to roll back the amount of fruits and vegetables given to school children. This is obviously terrible, so why do it? Well, because it was a Michelle Obama initiative, that’s why. Why do it now? It was Michelle Obama’s birthday.

No,   seriously .


The Trump administration moved on Friday to roll back school nutrition standards championed by Michelle Obama, an effort long sought by food manufacturers and some school districts that have chafed at the cost of Mrs. Obama’s prescriptions for fresh fruit and vegetables… Combating childhood obesity was Mrs. Obama’s  signature issue , a  rallying cry for her supporters and a lightning rod for conservative critics  who saw it as epitomizing the liberal “nanny state” of the Obama era.

The administration says, of course, that it was just a coincidence and not intentional:

A spokeswoman for the department said that it had not intended to roll out the proposed rule on Mrs. Obama’s birthday, although some Democratic aides on Capitol Hill had their doubts. Food companies applauded the proposal, while nutritionists condemned it, predicting that starchy foods like potatoes would replace green vegetables and that fattening foods like hamburgers would be served daily as “snacks.”

Sure. The folks at Red State are certainly   celebrating   it as an act of aggressive trolling. So even in the unlikely event it wasn’t intentional, Trump’s base is reveling in the meanness of it nonetheless. Which is further astonishing since…don’t some of these people also have kids who go to public schools? Certainly they must. Do they not care about their own children’s health? Apparently not as much as scoring a point against their hated political opponents.

It’s just another reminder that we don’t actually have a government. We have a cult of grievance orchestrated by a cable news network for bitter, angry bigots with a cruelty streak.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
JohnRussell
1  seeder  JohnRussell    one month ago

Lowlife see, lowlife do. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
1.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago

He is so intent on removing anything with the name Obama on it, he chooses to turn kids into fat mini me's of himself.  Chow down on fat and calorie laden food kids.  We will just roll you down the aisle on graduation day.

 
 
 
pat wilson
1.1.1  pat wilson  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1    one month ago

Lol, I think he's getting fatter by the day.

512

 
 
 
Ender
1.1.2  Ender  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1    one month ago

True. He is determined to wipe away anything with Obama's name.

Then people wonder why some call him racist.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
1.1.3  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Ender @1.1.2    one month ago

It is his narcissistic nature.  He doesn't care if he is doing harm to kinds as long as he can dissociate the name Obama from as many things as possible.

 
 
 
WallyW
1.1.4  WallyW  replied to  Ender @1.1.2    one month ago

Then people wonder why some call him racist.

It has nothing to do with race

 
 
 
Ender
1.1.5  Ender  replied to  WallyW @1.1.4    one month ago

Some say the whole birther thing was racist in nature. I tend to believe it was rooted in that.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
1.1.6  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @1.1.3    one month ago

Make that kids instead of kinds.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
1.1.7  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  Ender @1.1.2    one month ago

It is not racist to disagree with Obama policies or to reverse or undue them

 
 
 
Ender
1.1.8  Ender  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @1.1.7    one month ago

You can think what ever you want and so can I.

When his main objective is to try to remove anything and everything with Obama's name on it, and with trump's past, you can't tell me it didn't factor into it.

 
 
 
MrFrost
1.1.9  MrFrost  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @1.1.7    one month ago

It is not racist to disagree with Obama policies or to reverse or undue them

Even if they are good policies? I mean, what's the benefit of feeding kids more fatty foods? I mean, I get it, it was an Obama policy and I am sure it was JUST a coincidence that trump reversed it on M.O.'s birthday, but how do you justify that decision? 

Remove healthy food, add fatty unhealthy food. Makes no sense at all. 

 
 
 
devangelical
1.1.10  devangelical  replied to  MrFrost @1.1.9    one month ago
sure it was JUST a coincidence that trump reversed it on M.O.'s birthday

it proves what a petty and vindictive asshole he really is

 
 
 
MrFrost
1.1.11  MrFrost  replied to  devangelical @1.1.10    one month ago

it proves what a petty and vindictive asshole he really is

Let's add childish as well. 

 
 
 
MrFrost
1.1.12  MrFrost  replied to  pat wilson @1.1.1    one month ago
Lol, I think he's getting fatter by the day.

Looks like he has "dicky-do". But then he would have that if he was skinny. 

 
 
 
pat wilson
1.1.13  pat wilson  replied to  MrFrost @1.1.12    one month ago

jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
WallyW
1.2  WallyW  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago

You can't force kids to eat fruits and vegetables at school.

They either don't eat it, or it gets thrown out

 
 
 
Ender
1.2.1  Ender  replied to  WallyW @1.2    one month ago

I think that is kind of a myth. When I was a kid we ate apples, oranges, bananas, strawberries, grapes, peaches, pears....

When young I knew one girl that loved to get a whole coconut and break it open and eat it.

When I managed a private cafeteria a teenage relative of a coworker would eat raw bell peppers.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
1.2.2  sandy-2021492  replied to  Ender @1.2.1    one month ago

Our high school usually had two lunch lines - the day's hot entree, and a salad bar line.  The salad bar line was as long, if not longer, than the hot entree line most days.  We ate our veggies.

 
 
 
Ender
1.2.3  Ender  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.2.2    one month ago

I am a little prejudice. I am a salad fan.  Haha

There is a Greek restaurant here that I occasionally get their salad for lunch. It is a meal in itself.

During my cafeteria days we had a salad bar. It was one of our most popular things. We set it up for lunch and dinner.

Even when we had a group of teenagers, most of them would eat off of it.

Not as expensive or hard to maintain as some would make it out to be.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
1.2.4  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  sandy-2021492 @1.2.2    one month ago

Sometimes I would make a sub sandwich to take to school.  I made at least two in case someone with a shitty lunch or could not afford to pay would have a decent lunch.  My sub sandwiches were legendary.  Once, a teacher paid me to make a shit load of them for a game day at his house.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
1.2.5  sandy-2021492  replied to  Ender @1.2.3    one month ago

I've always loved a good salad.  My parents never had to coax me to eat my vegetables.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
1.3  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago

The kids in America’s schools are eternally grateful to President Trump for this action.  They can now eat their entire lunch 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.3.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @1.3    one month ago

You have no idea what you are talking about. That program set standards for school lunches to be healthy. For many students that is the only healthy meal they will have all day. Do some research before just repeating the party line. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
1.3.2  Ronin2  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.3.1    one month ago

Oh yes, they worked so well./S

https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/09/07/children-tossing-school-lunch-fruits-and-vegetables/?mtrref=www.google.com&gwh=F4767D214F020C57CD377D4D9F894CAC&gwt=pay&assetType=REGIWALL

You can lead a child to vegetables, but it appears you can’t make him eat.

Since 2012, the Department of Agriculture has required as part of the school lunch program that children select a fruit or a vegetable at each meal. School lunch offerings have been altered to fit the new regulations, but a new study suggests they are not working well.

Researchers took digital images of the school lunches of 498 children before the new vegetable rules were imposed. And then they gathered information fro another 944 children’s lunches as they went through vegetable-enhanced lunch lines.

After the new rules went into effect, more children selected fruits or vegetables — taking an average 0.89 cups from the lunch line compared with 0.69 cups before the rules were in place. But actual consumption dropped after the new vegetable rules were imposed. Vegetable and fruit consumption dropped to 0.45 cups, down from 0.51 before, and children were throwing out the required foods at a rate 56 percent higher than before the rules were instituted. The study is in Public Health Reports .

https://healthy-food-choices-in-schools.extension.org/why-reducing-food-waste-in-school-meal-programs-matters/

School foodservice directors have great pressures to meet federal, state, and local demands for nutrition, safety, and lunchroom participation. Consequently, the amount of food wasted vs. consumed becomes less of an issue to foodservice operations than does the amount of food prepared and purchased. This leaves food waste as an often overlooked component of healthy consumption. However, we have good reasons to pay more attention to the antecedents and consequences of food waste in our school lunchrooms. Here are some important considerations.  

Wasted Food is Wasted Nutrition

A primary reason to care about wasted food in school lunchrooms is nutritional in nature; not surprisingly, much of the waste comes from healthy items. A Harvard Public Health Study [1] revealed 60 percent of fresh vegetables and 40 percent of fresh fruit are being thrown away. If fruits and vegetables are taken but not consumed, then this nutrition is directly wasted. By reducing the amount of food wasted and increasing the amount consumed, of course the beneficial outcome would be improved nutritional intake. This is especially important for our most vulnerable, undernourished students where school foodservice is a primary source of nutrition.

Unintended Effects of Nutritional Policy

Improving students’ nutritional intake is not a new challenge, and much has been done toward improvements. However, there are public policies in place to encourage healthy consumption that may also be unintentionally exacerbating food waste. For example, over half of the nation’s public school students are currently eligible for free or reduced-price meals, [2] and the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 requires that each reimbursable meal must include a serving of both fruits and vegetables (the child must take one or the other). Not only are school systems reporting revenue losses of 15% due to this new policy, [3] a study from Cornell/Brigham Young [4] suggests that requiring students to place fruits and veggies on their tray increases waste substantially. In fact, waste may amount to almost $5 million a day across all 31.6 million national school lunch eaters. An important consideration is that the USDA currently reimburses school lunchrooms $3.07 for each free lunch and $2.67 for a reduced price lunch; [5] with 21.5 million free and reduce lunch eaters, the potential daily waste of USDA funds exceeds $16 million if everyone wastes a 75 cent orange or apple.

Offer a kid a choice of pizza, hamburger, hot dog, corn dog; or a salad, tomatoes, carrots, and celery and guess which most kids will readily jump on and which will be thrown in the garbage. Same with candy bar, ice cream, milk shake/malt, soda; or pretty much any fruit and healthy drink you can name. You can't for kids to eat. If they don't eat at school they will just tank up on junk food both before and after.  There is a reason that obesity didn't decrease after Michelle Obama's plan.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-kids-obesity/u-s-childhood-obesity-rates-rising-again-idUSKCN1GB2X5

Childhood obesity is a growing problem in the U.S., according to two new studies that suggest some recent reports of progress may have been incorrect, or that a downturn was fleeting at best.

Just four years ago, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that childhood obesity rates had leveled off and touted a dramatic 43 percent decline in obesity among kids ages 2 to 5 years during a 10-year period ending in 2012.

Now, however, it appears that childhood obesity has been steadily climbing for both boys and girls since 1999, researchers report in Pediatrics. More recently, there has also been a sharp increase in severe obesity among kids 2 to 5 years old.

“Obesity is not going away, and all kids are still at risk,” said lead author Asheley Cockrell Skinner of Duke University in Durham, North Carolina.

“This is not surprising, necessarily, but it is disheartening,” Skinner said by email. “It tells us that our efforts to improve the health of children are not reaching across the country.”

Skinner and colleagues examined data from the CDC’s National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), looking at data on children’s height and weight collected in two-year cycles starting with 1999-2000 and continuing through 2015-2016.

Overall, roughly 29 percent of kids were overweight and another 20 percent were obese at the start of the study. By the end, about 35 percent of children were overweight and another 26 percent were obese.

Obesity and severe obesity also increased sharply for kids ages 2 to 5 and for teen girls ages 16 to 19 in 2015-2016, compared to the previous two-year survey cycle.

If something isn't working; by all means throw more damn money into it. That always fixes everything.

The program wasn't working, period. Ending it will save the schools money, and stop the food waste. Better one semi healthy meal; than a bunch of more expensive vegetables and fruit that are just going to be tossed in the garbage to sooth some people's political angst.

 
 
 
MrFrost
1.3.3  MrFrost  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @1.3    one month ago

The kids in America’s schools are eternally grateful to President Trump for this action.  They can now eat their entire lunch 

And by teaching them to eat garbage, they'll be dead by the time they're 40, great job Trump!!!

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
1.3.4  sandy-2021492  replied to  Ronin2 @1.3.2    one month ago

Read my link @9, please.

Also, I'm not really sure we can blame obesity among 2-5 year olds on school lunches.  I mean, most kids start school at age 5, so...

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
1.3.5  sandy-2021492  replied to  MrFrost @1.3.3    one month ago
And by teaching them to eat garbage, they'll be dead by the time they're 40, great job Trump!!!

Diabeetus is pro-life ;)

 
 
 
CB
1.3.6  CB   replied to  Ronin2 @1.3.2    one month ago

Gripe and moan. So now you want to listen to kids! How convenient. BTW, 2012-2015 amounts to three years. That is not enough time to study and reverse trends. But conservatives pull out 'pointed" facts and say see all the time. None of it is trustworthy. But it can and usually does make a big 'splash'!

Let a generation or several go by. It can take as long to get kids accustomed to healthy foods in school meals, as it did to get them to love fast food and less or non-nutritional treats.

Conservatives are always trying to cut things short with their petty messaging. BTW, with the former in mind, trust that conservatives will never end their efforts to take away any social program per se.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
1.3.7  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @1.3    one month ago
The kids in America’s schools are eternally grateful to President Trump for this action.  They can now eat their entire lunch 

Michelle Obama gave a crap whether or not this nation's children, especially underprivileged children, had access to one healthy meal a day, and you have a problem with it?  

[deleted]

 
 
 
CB
1.3.8  CB   replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.3.7    one month ago

Sister!! Please stop by the front office on your way out!

 
 
 
Split Personality
1.3.9  Split Personality  replied to  Ronin2 @1.3.2    one month ago

Sugar and starch, sugar and starch, sugar and starch

A nation of fast food based on salty fried potatoes and sugary soft drinks...

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
1.3.10  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  CB @1.3.8    one month ago
Sister!! Please stop by the front office on your way out!

Oops.  I didn't realize I said that out loud.  Mea culpa.

 
 
 
CB
1.3.11  CB   replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @1.3.10    one month ago

You're the best, 'babe'! (I call all my besties 'babe' - no worries.)

 
 
 
dennis smith
1.3.12  dennis smith  replied to  MrFrost @1.3.3    one month ago

Dead by 40? Proof please.

 
 
 
squiggy
1.4  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago

This doesn't really document proposed changes but the stinkiest does seem to follow allowing local decision-making. I don't see how a few green beans are going to slim down that 200 pound eigth-grader when SNAP benefits allow for pizza, chips and ice cream. It's never the parents' fault - but just look at the cashier belt in front of you as the EBT card hits the reader.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2  Perrie Halpern R.A.    one month ago

I read this yesterday and I thought it was totally petty and also who would want our children to have less healthy meals at school?

It was a very petty move. 

 
 
 
CB
2.1  CB   replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2    one month ago

Interestingly, when I read what this was actually about you, as a teacher, biologist, and "vocal" independent I wanted to know if this moved you in any way. There is a bible expression "For if they do these things when the wood is green, what will happen when it is dry?"

President Donald Trump remains in his first term of office. His scale of contempt is "high" for the past inner workings of this country. How much higher will his disgust for what has come before go and expose itself, when he perceives himself "unstoppable"?

 
 
 
Ender
3  Ender    one month ago

The fattest states in the nation are red states.

Ironic that they cheer on trump and what he is doing.

Let their kids get fatter and take away healthcare.

Dumbasses are their own worst enemy.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
3.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Ender @3    one month ago

They think that beer and BBQ are food groups.

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
3.1.1  Larry Hampton  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3.1    one month ago

Lol , well to be fair ,,, jrSmiley_102_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Ender
3.1.2  Ender  replied to  Larry Hampton @3.1.1    one month ago

Haha   I drink beer but one has to be careful. One can get pregnant...

512

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
3.1.3  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Larry Hampton @3.1.1    one month ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
3.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Ender @3    one month ago

Source please?

 
 
 
Ender
3.2.1  Ender  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.2    one month ago

Google is your friend.

 
 
 
MrFrost
3.2.2  MrFrost  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.2    one month ago

2. The five states with the most room for improvement are Arkansas (No. 46), Oklahoma, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana, in ascending order. Last year, Mississippi ranked as the least healthy state.

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/rankings-and-ratings/the-healthiest-and-unhealthiest-states-in-america-where-did-your-state-rank-for-2018.html

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
3.2.3  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  MrFrost @3.2.2    one month ago

My thanks for the info. Appreciate it Sir.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
3.2.4  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Ender @3.2.1    one month ago

Not up to me to research the comment you made. You should be able to back yourself up, so I guess that means you didn't have much clue. You have a nice evening.

 
 
 
MrFrost
3.2.5  MrFrost  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.2.3    one month ago

My thanks for the info. Appreciate it Sir.

My pleasure buddy. 

 
 
 
Ender
3.2.6  Ender  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.2.4    one month ago

Not up to me to do simple research for others. If one cannot type fattest states then click enter...not my problem.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
3.2.7  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Ender @3.2.6    one month ago

Nice deflection.

 
 
 
Ender
3.2.8  Ender  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.2.7    one month ago

Holy crap dude. Does it really mean that much to you...

Ok, just for you. From fox news no less.

https://www.foxnews.com/health/most-obese-states-in-us

  1. West Virginia (38.1 percent)
  2. Mississippi (37.3 percent)
  3. Oklahoma (36.5 percent)
  4. Iowa (36.4 percent)
  5. Alabama (36.3 percent)
  6. Louisiana (36.2 percent)
  7. Arkansas (35 percent)
  8. Kentucky (34.3 percent)
  9. Alaska (34.2 percent)
  10. South Carolina (34.1 percent)
 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
3.2.9  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Ender @3.2.8    one month ago

All I asked you for was your source. Thank you. It could come from the man in the moon for all I care.

 
 
 
Ender
3.2.10  Ender  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @3.2.9    one month ago

I am glad we can get this behind us. You know I hate it when we fight.

Wait...I can never type things like that out have have it sound sincere. Haha

I might have to give Alaska a pass even though they appear in several lists.

Blubber would help with the cold. : )

 
 
 
lady in black
4  lady in black    one month ago

Everything pos crooked donnie touches turns to shit

 
 
 
Tacos!
5  Tacos!    one month ago
The Trump Administration decided to roll back the amount of fruits and vegetables given to school children. This is obviously terrible

It's obvious? How so? We have lots of evidence that kids throw the fruits and vegetables into the garbage.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
5.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Tacos! @5    one month ago

For every kid that does that, there is one who will take nutrition to heart.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @5.1    one month ago

My own son has.  Not that he doesn't like his junk food.  But he noticed he's getting a spare tire, and baseball season is coming, so he's been eating veggies and cutting carbs, and he's in the basement on my treadmill right now.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.2  Tacos!  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @5.1    one month ago

So maybe there's a middle ground where the government supplies less veggies and the kids who actually want them can take them.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.3  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.2    one month ago

How about we be the adults and not let the kids pick the menus?

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.4  Tacos!  replied to  sandy-2021492 @5.1.3    one month ago
How about we be the adults

They have adults in their lives. Parents.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.5  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.4    one month ago

Yes, and they have teachers and school administrators when they're at school.  Those adults are the ones responsible for taking care of them when they're not with their parents.  That includes some control over food choices offered with taxpayer funding.  I'd rather we pay for something that doesn't mean we'll be paying for premature heart disease and diabetes.  Call it financial conservativism, if you like.  And, you know, raising kids with some discipline.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.6  Tacos!  replied to  sandy-2021492 @5.1.5    one month ago
Yes, and they have teachers and school administrators when they're at school.

That's great. People who know how to teach math and writing or people who know how to run a facility. Super. They don't know anything about the nutritional needs of a particular child. They aren't counting everybody's macros or calories and incorporating knowledge of student health and activity. They are not qualified to be forcing specific nutrition at individual kids.

They can make healthy choices available. I see nothing wrong with that. It is up to the parents to manage the overall nutrition of their children. Not teachers, and not the government.

The government, by the way, has a really shitty track record when it comes to public nutritional recommendations. The government is a big part of the reason why America is fatter than ever.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.7  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.6    one month ago
They are not qualified to be forcing specific nutrition at individual kids.

I have never seen a child force-fed in public schools.  Having an orange on one's tray does not force the orange down one's throat.

I'm not sure what nutritional need you think is served by making more fried foods available.  Do you suspect there are students with a grease deficiency who are slipping through the cracks?  Do we need to add more French fries for everyone to remedy the lack?

It's not the government's job to indulge kids with junk food.  

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.8  XDm9mm  replied to  sandy-2021492 @5.1.5    one month ago
That includes some control over food choices offered with taxpayer funding.

Some paid bureaucrat hack in a school will have NO control over what my kids eat.  (Ok...  being a grandparent, I'm beyond that time, but I did deal with it for my grandkids.)

I'd rather we pay for something that doesn't mean we'll be paying for premature heart disease and diabetes. 

To be candid, while that is a great desire, it's none of your business.  Period, end of story.  You can explain things to them, fine.  But YOU don't get to tell them what to do.

Call it financial conservativism, if you like. 

Call it whatever you like.  Just stay out of personal familial choices and decisions.

And, you know, raising kids with some discipline.

Kids should be learning discipline at home.  The teachers today can't discipline kids without being called on the carpet for discrimination or some other nonsense.  Way too many are essentially being relegated to being nothing more than over paid day care attendants.  Let them earn their salaries as teachers and not babysitters.

 
 
 
CB
5.1.9  CB   replied to  Tacos! @5.1.6    one month ago
The government, by the way, has a really shitty track record when it comes to public nutritional recommendations. The government is a big part of the reason why America is fatter than ever.

Reduce that to the absurd. America's school age kids are in school nearly as many hours during a year as they are at home (exaggerated, but you can get my drift): Here is an idea. Along with a quality education lets feed them mediocre or worse "brain food" during their waking hours as a captive audience. They will think they are "happy" in the short-term, and undernourished over the long-term. Fine!

Highlight on your last sentence. You put down the government for trying to evolve towards better nutrition with "baby steps." And then you decry its unsatisfactory output. A lose-lose proposition. Where is the good ole-fashioned commonsense in that? Not this time, however. This one is on you! You are responsible for wanting to 'dumb down' school meals and regress the schools to diminutive treats and poor nourishment.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.10  XDm9mm  replied to  CB @5.1.9    one month ago
America's school age kids are in school more hours during a year than they are at home:

You really might want to check your math on that.  Going on the basis of 8 hours (an absurdly high number by the way) a day multiplied by the average 160 long school year, you're claiming that kids are in the home less than 1280 hours?

 
 
 
CB
5.1.11  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.10    one month ago

Yeah, I 'rethunk' it and edited (see above) that. You read the 'old' stuff. Good looking out though! (If you catch my drift!) Incidentally, did you ingest the point of that whole comment exercise?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.12  sandy-2021492  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.8    one month ago
Some paid bureaucrat hack in a school will have NO control over what my kids eat.  (Ok...  being a grandparent, I'm beyond that time, but I did deal with it for my grandkids.)

To accomplish that, you must pack lunch for them every day.  If they're eating school lunch, some bureaucratic hack is deciding what's in that lunch.

it's none of your business

If I'm paying taxes to support a school lunch program, then as a taxpayer, it is my business what that lunch program serves.

Just stay out of personal familial choices and decisions.

I have no problem with familial choices at all.  Families aren't cooking school lunches.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.13  XDm9mm  replied to  sandy-2021492 @5.1.12    one month ago
Some paid bureaucrat hack in a school will have NO control over what my kids eat.  (Ok...  being a grandparent, I'm beyond that time, but I did deal with it for my grandkids.)
To accomplish that, you must pack lunch for them every day. 

Did that.

it's none of your business
If I'm paying taxes to support a school lunch program, then as a taxpayer, it is my business what that lunch program serves.

Not telling my kids/grandkids what they can and can't eat.

Just stay out of personal familial choices and decisions.
I have no problem with familial choices at all.  Families aren't cooking school lunches.

And when those idiots only serve what a kid will throw in the trash, exactly how is that benefiting anyone?  Before my son went OCONUS, the local school system tossed the federal mandates and went back to what the kids would actually eat.  Surprise, surprise, they actually ate the food and the trash cans were empty.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.14  XDm9mm  replied to  CB @5.1.11    one month ago
Incidentally, did you ingest the point of that whole comment exercise?

I certainly did.  And as I indicated to Sandy, if the kids toss the 'nutritious' food in the trash, as opposed to eating the "mediocre" food, what is gained other than some kids being hungry and food being thrown out.

I'd prefer they get at least some food, even if it's not that great than nothing at all.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.15  sandy-2021492  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.13    one month ago
And when those idiots only serve what a kid will throw in the trash,

Except that they don't.  I had lunch with my son when he was in elementary school, when he still thought that was cool (now he's embarrassed I exist).  Kids were eating their salad.  They were eating their fruit.  The time I saw them have trouble eating fruit was on the school - they served whole, peeled kiwi fruit that couldn't be sliced with plastic knives and forks.  I saw a few kids try to eat it, and give up.

And, as some of us posted above, our own schools' salad bars were the more popular lunch choices.

Kids will eat fruits and vegetables.  Of course, some would rather have fries.  Some would rather live on chocolate cake.  Doesn't mean the state should provide them with a steady diet of fries and cake.

 
 
 
CB
5.1.16  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.14    one month ago

Okay. Here's a compromise. Suspend lunches and cafeteria times. Unemploy school kitchen staffs and planned meals! Allow parents to rearrange their daytime schedules and use their LIBERTY to come pick up little "juniors' and "misses," and allow their young adults can go off campus for lunches, and all can 'pig out' or 're-enerize' themselves accordingly. No harm-no foul practical! . . . Right? What's wrong with this picture?

(I mean really. If you don't want teachers and administrators and officials to care about your child, children, or grands, . . .if you don't want the best for them once they leave your presence and enter the 'world' —just throw up all kinds of red flags and curse the good that is out there. That will put those "busybody" professionals in their place but good!)

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
5.1.17  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.4    one month ago

Progressives think that government should parent our kids and take over our choices as parents from us.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.18  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  XDm9mm @5.1.8    one month ago

What are you talking about? 

The guidelines were for school lunches provided and paid for by local authorities. It was not about packed lunches. 

 
 
 
Ender
5.1.19  Ender  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @5.1.17    one month ago

Oh boo hoo. Schools tried to make kids eat healthy and some are acting like every right in the world has been taken from them.

Nothing constructive at all.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.20  Tacos!  replied to  sandy-2021492 @5.1.7    one month ago
Having an orange on one's tray does not force the orange down one's throat.

Never said it was. It just forces him to take it even though he’s going to throw it in the trash. And the self-righteous government types can pat themselves on the back for fixing the nutrition of America’s youth. This is fake. Giving it to a kid who doesn’t want it wastes the food. Maybe that kid gets fruit all the time at home and is sick of it.

Maybe some other kid who has zero access to fruit at home would like two oranges. Now he can’t have two because government forced the extra orange into the trash.

We have finite resources that should be managed with thoughtfulness and restraint.

 
 
 
CB
5.1.21  CB   replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @5.1.17    one month ago

There is always  home-schooling out there for consideration. The funkiest truth kept on the down-low of all is this: All liberty ain't good. Some liberty is actually bad. And for the record, parenting conservative children is not something any progressive looks forward to. Those 'long' hours and restless nights are prohibited. And oh, the tension headaches!

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.22  Tacos!  replied to  sandy-2021492 @5.1.7    one month ago
I'm not sure what nutritional need you think is served by making more fried foods available.

I never said more fried foods should be made available. Please stop making stuff up.

Do you suspect there are students with a grease deficiency who are slipping through the cracks?

It’s possible. Government has convinced people that fat is bad for them when it’s actually a critical macronutrient. 

Do we need to add more French fries for everyone to remedy the lack?

You don’t know the nutritional needs of every person. Potatoes are a perfectly good food. I would never say that French fries is all a person should eat but they can be a good part of a healthy diet. I would rather see kids better educated about nutrition and empowered to make smart choices relevant to their individual needs than to have government push some one-size-fits-all meal at them.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.23  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.20    one month ago
even though he’s going to throw it in the trash.

Yeah, as stated above, my schoolmates and I ate our veggies and fruit.  But then, we weren't raised to believe that we ruled the roost and our demands for junk food meant anything.

 
 
 
CB
5.1.24  CB   replied to  Tacos! @5.1.20    one month ago
Maybe that kid gets fruit all the time at home and is sick of it.

Maybe, smaybe. Let us all try not to be part of the problem in the United States. Remember, we can get through this if we all just put on our thinking caps, use common sense, a heaping amount of critical thinking, and calm the heaven down!

If one does not know what commonsense and critical thinking are: Ask somebody (quickly).

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.25  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.22    one month ago
Potatoes are a perfectly good food.

Preparation matters, tacos.  More broccoli and less fried foods are not going to deprive any child of adequate nutrition, and it doesn't require knowing every child's nutritional needs to know that.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.26  Tacos!  replied to  CB @5.1.9    one month ago
You are responsible for wanting to 'dumb down' school meals and regress the schools to diminutive treats and poor nourishment.

That doesn’t make sense and has no connection to anything I said.

Here’s a quick bit of food for your thought. 

Question #1: Is youth nutrition and dietary health today better or worse than it was 60 years ago? (I would say worse)

Question #2: Is government more or less involved in school nutrition than it was 60 years ago? (I would say more)

Conclusion: If you’re unhappy with youth nutrition and health, government is likely more of the cause than the solution.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.27  Tacos!  replied to  sandy-2021492 @5.1.7    one month ago
I'm not sure what nutritional need you think is served by making more fried foods available.

Where exactly did someone propose more fried foods?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.28  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.22    one month ago
I never said more fried foods should be made available. Please stop making stuff up.

That's the effect the loosened guidelines are likely to have.  Maybe you should examine what you're defending.

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/478816-trump-administration-to-roll-back-michelle-obamas-school-lunch-rules

he new rules would loosen requirements for serving size on fruits and vegetables. The latest change follows a 2019 rollback of restrictions on milk and sodium content in school lunches.

Critics said the change will pave the way for greasier, more unhealthy foods such as pizza, french fries and burgers.

"[It] would create a huge loophole in school nutrition guidelines, paving the way for children to choose pizza, burgers, french fries and other foods high in calories, saturated fat or sodium in place of balanced school meals every day,” Center for Science in the Public Interest's deputy director of legislative affairs, Colin Schwartz,   said in a statement Friday .

In a recent  op-ed for The Hill , Dr. Rachel Borton, the director of the Family Nurse Practitioner online program at Bradley University, said healthy school meals are essential to both good physical and mental health, especially for low-income students who are more likely to receive their only healthy meal of the day while at school.

...

In 2019,  the first comprehensive analysis  of the Obama administration's lunch plan by the Department of Agriculture found the updates "had a positive and significant influence on nutritional quality" as students ate more whole grains, greens, and beans, as well as fewer “empty calories.”

 
 
 
MrFrost
5.1.29  MrFrost  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.2    one month ago

So maybe there's a middle ground where the government supplies less veggies and the kids who actually want them can take them.

The problem is that either way, the food is tossed out. Think fast food joints. You get the wrong order, they usually say to keep it because if you don't, it goes in the trash. Same thing with school buffets, (for lack of a better term). 

 
 
 
CB
5.1.30  CB   replied to  Tacos! @5.1.26    one month ago

What?! And that connects to this present rollback of fruits and vegetables in school meals by the Trump Administration how? The new "rules" were in place only short-term. So what's there to criticize?

BTW, why are you arguing healthy fruits and vegetables versus fast food and 'junk' anyway?

 
 
 
MrFrost
5.1.31  MrFrost  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @5.1.17    one month ago

Progressives think that government should parent our kids and take over our choices as parents from us.

And apparently, regressives think feeding our kids shitty fatty foods is much better than feeding them something healthy. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.32  Tacos!  replied to  sandy-2021492 @5.1.28    one month ago

So, then you do want to force kids to eat the fruits and veggies. Or go hungry.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.33  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.32    one month ago

We all have choices in life, Tacos.  Nobody will force kids to eat anything.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.34  Tacos!  replied to  CB @5.1.30    one month ago
The new "rules" were in place only short-term.

No, the government has been trying to tell people what to eat for decades. And the story keeps changing. They have made several errors that have led people to consume large quantities of processed carbs like bread and rice, which have increased obesity.

why are you arguing healthy fruits and vegetables versus fast food and 'junk' anyway?

I'm not. You are. This is a conversation you are having with yourself. I have not advocated fast food or junk food anywhere. I invite you to cite the place where I have.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.35  Tacos!  replied to  sandy-2021492 @5.1.33    one month ago

Then just make the food available. That's all I'm saying. It's frankly stupid to shove an apple into a kid's hand if he's just going to throw it away. Leave it out for him. If he wants it, he can take it.

If kids cannot be convinced to eat the apples, and apples are left over, it makes sense to supply less apples. Maybe try a different fruit if you want to be persistent. But stop wasting food and public resources.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.36  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.32    one month ago

This one just cracks me up, BTW.  All parents better go out and buy Twinkies, ice cream, Milky Ways, etc.  If they insist on fixing broccoli without adding a choice of Twinkie, instead, they're forcing the little darlings to eat that nasty vegetable.  The horror of not letting kids eat themselves into malnutrition and a mouthful of rotted teeth.  It's child abuse, I tell you!

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.37  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.35    one month ago
if he's just going to throw it away.

@9.  The Obama-era rules did not increase food waste in the long term.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.38  Tacos!  replied to  sandy-2021492 @5.1.36    one month ago
The horror of not letting kids eat themselves into malnutrition and a mouthful of rotted teeth.

Because that's the only other possible option? It's your way or the apocalypse? This is why people can't talk about things anymore.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.39  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.38    one month ago

If you don't like hyperbole, Tacos, maybe don't accuse me of forcing kids to eat healthy.  They have the choice to eat what they're served, or not.  Many a parent, by your definition of "forced", has therefore "forced" a child to eat what's served, because they recognize that children are generally not the best decision-makers in the world.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.40  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.35    one month ago
But stop wasting food and public resources.

Restaurants, grocery stores, and families throw out tons of food every day. It seems a little over reaching to accuse schools of wasting food. 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
5.1.41  1stwarrior  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.34    one month ago

Yeah - and look at the examples of the folks "advocating" for government recommended foods.  Every one of them are overweight and, probably, not very healthy.

Let the govenment stick to the laws they are required to monitor - keep them away from "health" issues.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
5.1.42  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.40    one month ago

Here ya go John -

In the  United States food  waste is estimated at between 30-40 percent of the  food  supply. This estimate, based on estimates from USDA's Economic Research Service of 31 percent  food  loss at the retail and consumer levels, corresponded to approximately 133 billion pounds and $161 billion worth of  food.

And that doesn't even cover the wastefulness in the homes.

https://www.usda.gov/foodwaste/faqs

Can you imagine???  133 BILLION pounds - $161 BILLION worth of food.

 
 
 
CB
5.1.43  CB   replied to  Tacos! @5.1.34    one month ago

Oh please. Tell it to someone who wants to idle in conversation. There is no third option presented.

 
 
 
CB
5.1.44  CB   replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.40    one month ago

It's how s/he makes points by hyperbole. Just latch onto a gripe and pound it "home" non-stop.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.45  Tacos!  replied to  sandy-2021492 @5.1.39    one month ago
maybe don't accuse me of forcing kids to eat healthy.

I didn’t say that either. You want to force them to eat what you want them to eat. You don’t know what will be most healthy for any particular kid. If a kid gets nothing but veggies at home, they might need proteins and fats from school. Or maybe they do like veggies, but just not the ones you want to provide. 

Where progressivism goes wrong is the when the progressive thinks he or she knows so much better than the people they are trying to help. All I have been saying is give people education and choices, listen to their decisions and spend our resources accordingly. You want to turn that very sensible give and take into I want them to eat junk food and have rotten teeth.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.46  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.40    one month ago

They’re wasting their own resources, then. Not someone else’s.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.47  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.46    one month ago

You are crabbing about nothing.  When multitudes of people are fed there will always be some waste. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.48  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.45    one month ago
You want to force them to eat what you want them to eat.

Nope.  I want a healthy meal to be provided if I'm the one paying for it (and as a taxpayer, I am).  They can either eat it, bring lunch, or go hungry.  This is a choice that many of them face when their parents make something they don't like for dinner - eat it, or go hungry.  That's not forcing anybody.  That's just saying they're not entitled to a different meal from what is provided for them.

What makes you think school lunches don't have protein, or fat?  They generally contain some sort of meat, and often cheese - protein and fat both, right there.  Beans are not unheard of in school lunches, nor are eggs.

What "choices" do you propose?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.49  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.46    one month ago

Oh, and the wasted food thing?

Not really an issue.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-administration-relax-school-lunch-rules-2018-1#studies-suggest-that-students-have-gotten-used-to-the-new-healthier-options-and-are-eating-more-nutritious-food-at-school-than-they-were-when-the-rules-were-first-implemented-4

Part of the argument for relaxing the lunch nutrition rules, which were first established by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act (rolled out nationwide in 2012), is that students weren't eating the healthier food offered at school. But studies show that's not true.    A 2014 study in the Journal of Child Nutrition & Management reported that schoolkids were eating more fiber and less saturated fat, while another in the   American Journal of Preventive Medicine   said they were consuming around 15% more fruits and vegetables. A   third study   in Childhood Obesity noted the nutrition changes "do not increase total plate waste."
 
 
 
Split Personality
5.1.50  Split Personality  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.26    one month ago

I would expect links for #1 and #2 before I offered a conclusion.

Just saying, you seem to be going off of your feeiings...

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.51  Tacos!  replied to  Split Personality @5.1.50    one month ago

Government influence is easy enough to find. The track record is not great, as evidenced by the continual revisionism in the effort.

The Evolution of the Food Pyramid

original

Did the government’s dietary guidelines help make us fat?

I’m not here to say the government is solely to blame for increasing obesity, but I will say we should not be relying on the government to feed the children. In getting everyone panicked about fat and filling the bottom of the food pyramid with bread, they drove much of America to consume mass quantities of simple carbs, which are not as satiating as fat and protein and promote insulin resistance, contributing to overeating and weight gain.

I also say that it’s wasteful to keep pushing foods at kids if they just throw it away. Over and over here I have advocated for the opportunity to make educated choices.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.1.52  sandy-2021492  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.51    one month ago
I also say that it’s wasteful to keep pushing foods at kids if they just throw it away.

They're not.  At least, not more than they did before the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids guidelines.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
5.1.53  XDm9mm  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.18    one month ago
What are you talking about?  The guidelines were for school lunches provided and paid for by local authorities. It was not about packed lunches. 

Read the entire thread PH....   not just the snippet's.   I never said what you THINK I did.  I was responding to Sandy that I DID pack the grandkids lunches since the local school was serving what they wouldn't eat.

 
 
 
CB
5.2  CB   replied to  Tacos! @5    one month ago

So the solution is not to offer well-balanced meals, instead pile on low nutritional value foods? Feed capitalism:starve nutritionally the kid's of tomorrow?

Feed the kids more crap food that they can get anywhere and do it from a local, state, and federal perspective? Why not promote fruits and vegetables in a qualitative "pitch" to a healthier lifestyle and future campaign. Drop the old status quo of gluttony for it's own sake?

Also, the Trump Administration's disrespect of other leaders it is at odds with is legendary. We don't have to guess at any deep-seated intent of Trump or his administration. We know he does not mind trampling on the Obamas, Bushs, Clintons, Carters, foreign leaders who are not 'strongmen,' and small leaders like in Ukraine. We can probably go with an "all of the above" approach to explain why and now the administration did this.

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.2.1  Tacos!  replied to  CB @5.2    one month ago
So the solution is not to offer well-balanced meals

Why does the food at school need to come in the form of a "well-balanced meal?" What does that even mean? What makes you think a person needs to eat a fruit or a vegetable every time they eat?

Without knowing anything about a particular kid or how they eat at home, you are declaring what they need to eat at one or two meals of the day when they are at school. That is nutritional malpractice.

Feed the kids more crap food

What is crap food?

Why not promote fruits and vegetables in a qualitative "pitch" to a healthier lifestyle and future campaign.

By all means, promote it. But trying to force it on kids is clearly a "fruitless" endeavor.

Drop the old status quo of gluttony for it's own sake?

I don't even know what that is or how it could be promoted in schools.

 
 
 
CB
5.2.2  CB   replied to  Tacos! @5.2.1    one month ago

Only several points are needed:

1. Commonsense. 2. Science and nutrition. 3. Fast food. (lLike that which is strategically killing the youth of tomorrow and turning an incremental number of them into "rollie-pollies.")

Lastly, you can argue a great many things in that style of yours. Don't try arguing fat, flabby, out of shape, kids. Commonsense will prevail. If something is for the good, all of us should be able to open our mouths and tap on our keyboards to state so!

When Donald Trump is wrong, say so. Rebuke wrong-headedness like you do with other presidents I presume. Of course, the corporations which love and need capital want to sell anybody, all of us, on more salt, sugar, fats, and byproducts, all blended in the right proportions to suit our taste.

We have to be the smart ones. Process food is pervasive. It is in vending machines, on store shelves, in our children's lunch bags and boxes, on wives and parents shopping lists—you name it: it's encompasses us daily.

Even though we love our processed foods, we are foolish to not call "fast food" what it is: fast and not the "best" for any of us over a life time.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
5.2.3  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Tacos! @5.2.1    one month ago

What is crap food?

Fries, deep fried anything, cookies, cake, mac and cheese, pizza, and anything considered empty calories.  These things should be considered a treat and not a normal diet.  Kids used to work this shit off through daily activities.  Now, they stuff themselves with junk food at home and school and spend hours on gaming systems. Rather than use recess to get exercise, they break out their cell phones and spend the time on FB, twitter, IG, etc.

 
 
 
PJ
5.2.4  PJ  replied to  CB @5.2.2    one month ago

But fast food is what the blacks and other minorities are used to because it's cheap.  Why in the word we would we want to try and give them meals they clearly are not able to afford outside of school.  Soon they'll be getting uppity and think they are entitled to the same things white's have including living wage jobs. /s

Let's not even talk about how poor nutrition leads to poor health which leads to higher health insurance premiums because health costs are passed on to those who can subsidize the cost of the uninsured.  

 
 
 
CB
5.2.5  CB   replied to  PJ @5.2.4    one month ago

I agree. I don't know how fast food ever got the 'wrap' that it is good for us. It is material turned into a commercial 'product' designed for a quick sale. Thus, it is designed by the producers to move out and be consumed. And, repeat. The public's health is not a primary factor in capitalistic endeavors. Although, one would think the manufacturers could see a benefit in keeping their customers alive if only to spend a lifetime purchasing.

"Across the lips and on the hips." Big Corp gets paid! That's how it is meant to go!

 
 
 
charger 383
6  charger 383    one month ago

Our high school lunches were usually good but grade school food was overcooked and did not taste good to me 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
6.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  charger 383 @6    one month ago

Our high school cooks were pretty good.  The days we didn't like lunch were usually the days when they served pre-made foods.  Like the pizza - it was frozen, sometimes even still when it got to us.  But they made a mean homemade chili and baked chicken from scratch.

Middle school lunches were terrible.

You know, the schools here still have hot rolls?  They're whole wheat, but they smell every bit as good baking as they did when we were growing up, and taste just as good.  When I'd have lunch with my son, I'd try to take his hot roll, too.  Just about got my hand stabbed ;)

 
 
 
charger 383
6.1.1  charger 383  replied to  sandy-2021492 @6.1    one month ago

Yes, those hot rolls were good, glad to hear they still make them.  The home ec teacher was head of the kitchen then 

 
 
 
CB
7  CB     one month ago

Isn't there an old saying that goes something like: "I'm from [Twinkies Corporation] and I am here to help." No? Hmm. Could have fooled me.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
7.1  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  CB @7    one month ago

No.  The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help.  Reagan was right. 

 
 
 
CB
7.1.1  CB   replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @7.1    one month ago

And yet, private contractors keep on calling in the Feds to make sense of what has gone wrong. At the end of the day; government rocks!

 
 
 
Kathleen
8  Kathleen    one month ago

I think they need a good balance of different foods. Healthy and fun foods. There are kids that need calories too. When I went to school, the lunches were so good. Hot turkey with mashed potatoes, grilled cheese with tomato soup, spaghetti with a salad. Chicken nuggets, Mexican food, soggy vegetables and fruit cocktail is what they serve now. Low fat milk and my daughter did not like it. She was slender anyway... I packed her lunch most of the time.  The quality of the food has gone down hill.

 
 
 
CB
8.1  CB   replied to  Kathleen @8    one month ago

Could it have anything (at all) to do with conservatives who moan about any uplifting policy for the "betterment" of ate-able substances in schools? I mean, conservatives decry expenditures-as if- the schools don't have to purchase the foodstuffs (you remember) in bulk and store it.

Schools are trying to aid in the health of student populations specifically to facilitate study, and overall good health. But, by no means, do they plan to be the source of all the quality meals any child gets in the span of a day (or weekend), in my opinion.

 
 
 
Kathleen
8.1.1  Kathleen  replied to  CB @8.1    one month ago

Why would you say that? What is in my comment that drove you to come to that analysis? 

I was talking about the food for the past 20 years...

 
 
 
CB
8.1.2  CB   replied to  Kathleen @8.1.1    one month ago
 The quality of the food has gone down hill.

You ended your comment with that. If I missed your point, I apologize.

 
 
 
Kathleen
8.1.3  Kathleen  replied to  CB @8.1.2    one month ago

You did, and I accept.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
9  sandy-2021492    one month ago

Oh, and the wasted food thing?

Not really an issue.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-administration-relax-school-lunch-rules-2018-1#studies-suggest-that-students-have-gotten-used-to-the-new-healthier-options-and-are-eating-more-nutritious-food-at-school-than-they-were-when-the-rules-were-first-implemented-4

Part of the argument for relaxing the lunch nutrition rules, which were first established by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act (rolled out nationwide in 2012), is that students weren't eating the healthier food offered at school. But studies show that's not true.  A 2014 study in the Journal of Child Nutrition & Management reported that schoolkids were eating more fiber and less saturated fat, while another in the  American Journal of Preventive Medicine  said they were consuming around 15% more fruits and vegetables. A  third study  in Childhood Obesity noted the nutrition changes "do not increase total plate waste."
 
 
 
Kathleen
10  Kathleen    one month ago

It’s not just lunch that kids need good nutrition, parents have to make sure that their kids get a good breakfast and dinner. Maybe not have so much junk food at home. Do some chores after school and other activities. It’s not just up to the schools, home is where good eating habits start.

 
 
 
CB
11  CB     one month ago

One could be forgiven for wondering what high society feeds its kids, and if junk food is really "the thing."

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online