The left should chill

Stretch said:
It's always better for kids to brown bag it. You just typed "A recent study found that children who regularly ate school lunches were 29 percent more likely to be obese than their peers who brought lunch from home."
Click to expand...

I don't think he read it......he just cut and pasted it......
 
anatta said:
the states can't advocate healthy eating and determine what kids eat???
It's amazing -absolutely freaking unreal- the depths the fed's will plumb,and the support they get from statists..

Use some block grants. tell the states they want healthy meals served where possible,and let the states run their own lunchrooms.
Kids dumping lunches into trash cans is but one aspect of the demise of federalism
Click to expand...
??Is the healthy eating requirements different in Texas & say Washington?

Why do we need 50 states + territories etc paying & determining/duplicating what their kids need?

Ya'll want smaller gubment & then require massive duplication???
 
Bill said:
??Is the healthy eating requirements different in Texas & say Washington?

Why do we need 50 states + territories etc paying & determining/duplicating what their kids need?

Ya'll want smaller gubment & then require massive duplication???
Click to expand...
not "duplification" . Different staes have diffent foods available -or kids like different regional dishes.
It's absolutely astounding that we need a federal government to design a menu for all the states.
Why even have states if they can't do something so basic as to feed kids lunch?

There is nothing wrong with Michelle advocating eating whatever. But "Certification of Compliance?? wtf??
do we need a "Healthy Hunger-Free Kids act?? ..talk about over-reach...Are we capable of existing without federal standards?

Certification of Compliance

The Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act provides an additional 6-cents per lunch reimbursement to school districts that certified to be in compliance with the new meal patterns. The increased reimbursement, a significant investment in improving the quality of school meals, are provided to school districts once they meet the new meal patterns published in the final rule on January 26, 2012. Funding became available to school districts starting October 1, 2012
http://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/certification-compliance

Look at this crazy useless insane regulatory requirement to SERVE A LUNCH
http://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/nutrition-standards-school-meals
In summary, the January 2011
proposed rule sought to improve
lunches and breakfasts by requiring
schools to:
•
Offer fruits and vegetables as two
separate meal components;
•
Offer fruit daily at breakfast and
lunch;
•
Offer vegetables daily at lunch,
including specific vegetable subgroups
weekly (dark green, orange, legumes,
and other as defined in the 2005 Dietary
Guidelines) and a limited quantity of
starchy vegetables throughout the week;
•
Offer whole grains: half of the
grains would be whole grain-rich upon
implementation of the rule and all
grains would be whole-grain rich two
years post implementation;
•
Offer a daily meat/meat alternate at
breakfast;
•
Offer fluid milk that is fat-free
(unflavored and flavored) and low-fat
(unflavored only);
•
Offer meals that meet specific
calorie ranges for each age/grade group;
•
Reduce the sodium content of meals
gradually over a 10-year period through
two intermediate sodium targets at two
and four years post implementation;
•
Prepare meals using food products
or ingredients that contain zero grams of
trans
fat per serving;
•
Require students to select a fruit or
a vegetable as part of the reimbursable
meal;
•
Use a single food-based menu
planning approach; and
•
Use narrower age/grade groups for
menu planning.
In addition, the proposed rule sought
to improve school meals by requiring
State agencies (SAs) to:
•
Conduct a nutritional review of
school lunches and breakfasts as part of
the administrative review process;
•
Determine compliance with the
meal patterns and dietary specifications
based on a review of menu and production records for a two-week
period; and
•
Review school lunches and
breakfasts every 3 years, consistent with
the HHFKA.
 
Stretch said:
Then the government needs to simply ensure that we the people can maintain our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Funny isn't it, it's always the cranky leftys screaming and whining to have the right to do and say whatever they want to "do to their bodies". Hypocrites!

It's always better for kids to brown bag it. You just typed "A recent study found that children who regularly ate school lunches were 29 percent more likely to be obese than their peers who brought lunch from home."

Federal government needs to butt out of our personal lives and personal decisions.
Click to expand...

You're certainly have the right to your opinion of what government is or isn't .. but what it will be will be determined by the society of the day. Only they will define what government is or isn't.

Are you a Christian. :0) Just wondering
 
Lunch for me in the 60's. There was no hot food cafeteria.

Tuna sandwich - lettuce and celery
Twinkee or junk snack
carton of milk
apple slice/chunk of fruit.

I lived on this for 8 years and survived without Acts
 
anatta said:
Lunch for me in the 60's. There was no hot food cafeteria.

Tuna sandwich - lettuce and celery
Twinkee or junk snack
carton of milk
apple slice/chunk of fruit.

I lived on this for 8 years and survived without Acts
Click to expand...

And that's what you'd recommend for school kids today .. because you survived it?
 
blackascoal said:
And that's what you'd recommend for school kids today .. because you survived it?
Click to expand...
what's wrong with it?
I brown bagged it ( Catholic school)..why do we need this enormous regulation by the USDA?

And I'm not besmirching Michelle -she's advocating healthy food. That a fine and proper role for a 1st lady.

My "beef" is forced compliance to a menu that regualtes even the type of veggies ( see links above the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act)
are we a nation of people unable to serve a decent lunch without fed'l regs?
 
anatta said:
not "duplification" . Different staes have diffent foods available -or kids like different regional dishes.
.
Click to expand...

Aaahh I think most foods are available every place in this country..:palm:

I am guessing you think the big bad fed can't do regional foods??
 
Bill said:
Aaahh I think most foods are available every place in this country..:palm:

I am guessing you think the big bad fed can't do regional foods??
Click to expand...
i'm saying it's really not up to the USDA to regulate to the states what to serve for lunch.
 
anatta said:
what's wrong with it?
I brown bagged it ( Catholic school)..why do we need this enormous regulation by the USDA?

And I'm not besmirching Michelle -she's advocating healthy food. That a fine and proper role for a 1st lady.

My "beef" is forced compliance to a menu that regualtes even the type of veggies ( see links above the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act)
are we a nation of people unable to serve a decent lunch without fed'l regs?
Click to expand...

I just don't know what to tell you brother. Soulless. I have no understanding of people who think as you do.

I'm not trying to pick a fight .. I'm simply lost for understanding. These are children we're talking about.

Yikes.
 
blackascoal said:
I just don't know what to tell you brother. Soulless. I have no understanding of people who think as you do.

I'm not trying to pick a fight .. I'm simply lost for understanding. These are children we're talking about.

Yikes.
Click to expand...
no problem. I have no desire to bicker either. My problem is the freaking feds are in everything.
I do not think the Founders envisioned the federal government regulating kids lunches.

There are enumerated powers -and the Preamble ( General welfare clause) but even the Preamble has to have some limits.
That was why the 10th was put in -to ensure some limits as well as mutual sovereignty
 
anatta said:
no problem. I have no desire to bicker either. My problem is the freaking feds are in everything.
I do not think the Founders envisioned the federal government regulating kids lunches.

There are enumerated powers -and the Preamble ( General welfare clause) but even the Preamble has to have some limits.
That was why the 10th was put in -to ensure some limits as well as mutual sovereignty
Click to expand...

You have serious misconceptions about the tenth but you didn't listen when I explained before so I won't bother now.
 
anatta said:
no problem. I have no desire to bicker either. My problem is the freaking feds are in everything.
I do not think the Founders envisioned the federal government regulating kids lunches.

There are enumerated powers -and the Preamble ( General welfare clause) but even the Preamble has to have some limits.
That was why the 10th was put in -to ensure some limits as well as mutual sovereignty
Click to expand...

The Founders were liberals. There is a reason why it was called 'The Age of Enlightenment'

They created a foundation to be built upon, but I doubt they expected we would be quoting their words hundreds of years later to adjudicate issues they had no knowledge or understanding of.

Like Jefferson, I believe that no society or generation should be held hostage to the thoughts of people dead long ago.
 
Comrade Watermark said:
You have serious misconceptions about the tenth but you didn't listen when I explained before so I won't bother now.
Click to expand...
this from someone who calls the 10th a "dead letter?" if I recall.
why not simply block grant to poorer states?

I admit to being an advocate of cooperative federalism. I get we aren't going back.
But I'd settle for the Reagan practice of new federalism - and not regulating the contents of lunches..
 
blackascoal said:
The Founders were liberals. There is a reason why it was called 'The Age of Enlightenment'

They created a foundation to be built upon, but I doubt they expected we would be quoting their words hundreds of years later to adjudicate issues they had no knowledge or understanding of.

Like Jefferson, I believe that no society or generation should be held hostage to the thoughts of people dead long ago.
Click to expand...
interesting. I'dlike to see the Jefferson quote .

Not their words governing us today, but the structure ( balance of powers) remains the law of the land.
We're so far gone when you study this stuff it's absolutely shocking how far we have drifted to the point of limitless fed'l expansion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top