The Advancement of the Toxic Totalitarian Nanny State
So it has come to this. A pre-schooler’s school lunch, lovingly prepared by a grandparent, was replaced with a cafeteria meal because it didn’t meet the exacting bureaucratic standards laid out by the bought-and-paid-for-by-industry Food and Drug Administration:
The Division of Child Development and Early Education at the Department of Health and Human Services requires all lunches served in pre-kindergarten programs – including in-home day care centers – to meet USDA guidelines. That means lunches must consist of one serving of meat, one serving of milk, one serving of grain, and two servings of fruit or vegetables, even if the lunches are brought from home.
When home-packed lunches do not include all of the required items, child care providers must supplement them with the missing ones.
The girl’s mother — who said she wishes to remain anonymous to protect her daughter from retaliation – said she received a note from the school stating that students who did not bring a “healthy lunch” would be offered the missing portions, which could result in a fee from the cafeteria, in her case $1.25.
This is appalling in several ways.
First, for years now, Jonah Goldberg (and others) have been pointing out the totalitarian nature of the “progressive” movement, which seeks to expand the government sphere into every aspect of our lives (with the apparent singular exception of whether or not we can kill unborn children). It was on full display during confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan when, in a response to a question from Senator (and medical doctor) Tom Coburn, she revealed her own totalitarian mindset:
On Tuesday evening, Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) posed a hypothetical question to Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan: If Congress passed a law that said Americans “have to eat three vegetables and three fruits, every day … does that violate the Commerce Clause?”
“Sounds like a dumb law,” Kagan replied.
…I think that the question about whether it is a dumb law is different from the question of whether it’s constitutional. And I think the courts would be wrong to strike down laws that they think are senseless just because they’re senseless.
COBURN: Well, I guess the question I’m asking you is: Do we have the power to tell people what they have to eat every day?
KAGAN: Senator Coburn, um…
If you missed it at the time, watch the video. In saying that such a law was dumb, but constitutional, she got it exactly backwards (one of the many reasons that she should not have been confirmed). Such a law would actually be a smart law, in that it would make for a healthier populace. But it would be tyrannical. And as tyranny goes, the school-lunch incident is relatively petty, but it is tyranny nonetheless.
But in this case, unlike Senator Coburn’s hypothetical, it was both tyrannical and dumb. It was dumb for two reasons. First, whoever assessed the lunch to be inadequate was an apparent idiot, because it did in fact conform with the guidelines — bread constitutes a grain, turkey is meat, and she had a banana and apple juice, which looks like at least two portions of fruit (the guideline says fruit or vegetable, not fruit and vegetable). All it lacked was the milk (though arguably, the cheese could have substituted, depending on what you think the purpose of the milk is), which could have been supplied without giving her a whole cafeteria meal, as a result of which she ate nothing but chicken nuggets, because she doesn’t like vegetables, or apparently anything else on the tray.
But the second reason it was dumb is because the guidelines themselves are based on junk science:
When the Food Pyramid was released to the public, the Office of the Secretary of Agriculture had made drastic changes to it. These changes had nothing to do with improving nutrition — and everything to do with improving the profits of the food industry!
Crackers, baked goods and low-nutrient processed foods were taken from the top of the pyramid and moved to the base, where they were to make up the bulk of the American diet. The team’s recommendation of 2 to 4 servings of whole-grain breads and cereals was nixed. The “new” Pyramid called for 6-11 servings of bread, cereals and pasta. No doubt, these changes pleased the corn, wheat and packaged food industries.
And in fact, the evidence continues to accumulate that grains, whether whole or not, and especially wheat are bad for us, but that saturated fats are just fine, exactly the opposite of the government recommendations that drove the food nanny to ignorantly nix the kid’s lunch.
So, let’s recap. A child takes a relatively healthy lunch to school. A bureaucrat decides that it is his or her job to inspect said lunch, and on the basis of flawed federal guidelines, driven by agricultural industry profits rather than actual nutritional science, compels her to eat a lunch supplied by the state, resulting in her actual malnourishment and shame for being the offspring of such irresponsible people. And as with the grand tradition of totalitarian states like Iran, in which the family of the executed is charged for the firing-squads’ bullets, the family of the malnourished child is to be charged a buck and a quarter for the privilege.
I guarantee you this: when this program – whatever the devil it is – was first proposed, someone said it will lead to inspectors demanding to see what’s in kid’s lunches, and insisting they eat something else instead of what mom sent. And the critic got a cold, withering look from the good people in charge. Really. I think that’s a little overboard.
You could say: yank the kid! Private schools! But they’ll be next; there’s no possible argument left for letting some private institution wreak their havoc on juvenile constitutions, particularly if they partake of some governmental benefit, like “Streets” or “water” or perhaps clean air.
Yes, I know. Really. I think that’s a little overboard.
As the Instapundit says, there used to be a solution for this sort of thing. It involved a hot thick hydrocarbon solution, bird coverings, and a rail. But sadly, it’s gone out of fashion.
We’ll have to make do with the ballot box this coming fall. If it’s not too late.
great. so I would have to get a permission to eat kosher, which doesn’t allow meat and dairy at the same meal, as would 7th day Adventists and other vegetarians and then what of the lactose intolerant?? and no one should drink water instead of milk…
No, Michal. All the Jewish schools have to do is pay for it, put it on the plate, serve it to the kid and tell them to eat it. It’s OK if they secretly believe the kid shouldn’t mix meat and milk, so long as they don’t say it out loud. Also, 98% of Jews don’t keep Kosher anyway, so what’s the problem? Who would have thought that in this day and age nutrition would be attacked by anti-nutrition nuts like you. (Actually, Michal, I think your comment is prescient and very perceptive.)
You are not a nutritionist, you are a tyrant.
I have the right to eat whatever thing is good, as long as I respect the same right in my fellow humans: I won’t eat humans.
Yes, it’s my right to be obese. Being a thin-skeletic top model is also my right. I will live and I will die according to my values (or anti-values) and f*ck the government and f*ck you all-regulating tyrant wannabees.
IF children have rigths, then they have the same rights as adults and the last thing government have to do is to confiscate private property to a child.
(X: Please turn up your sarcasm sensor.)
Two cannibals were happily devouring a circus clown when one turned to the other and said, “Hey, does this taste funny to you?”
badump pishhhhhhhh
Or maybe he needs to go rent one! =:O
I think it is because you forgot the /sarc tag. (/sarc) Cheers -
if that’s sarcasm, then you are just terrible at it. Give up.
Actually, Laka, the minute they put it on the same plate, they have rendered it non-kosher.
Not that it would matter to our superiors in the Obama administration, who have made it clear that they think religious freedom includes the right to attend the house of worship of your choice on Sunday morning, but not to act as if it, you know, really matters. And of course, religious freedom, as you pointed out, does not include the right to object to things that your religion forbids you to do if a sufficient number of your co-religionists ignore the prohibition.
tell it like it is, X. love ya!
Beautifully done.
“Faith without works is dead.” If your works deny what you claim to believe, you don’t really believe it. Now I don’t believe that it is a sin not to obey kosher regulations, least of all those that are not actually in the Bible, but that’s because my Rabbi said, “It is what comes out of the mouth (slander, hatred, blasphemy, etc.) that makes a man unclean, not what goes into the mouth (food and drink).” Before Jesus rose from the dead, the kosher laws were binding on believers as a mark of holiness, that is, separation from the wickedness of the world, and the Maccabees were willing to die rather than even give the appearance of consuming pork.
Don’t worry about that, Michal. Religious liberty is guaranteed by the Constitution. Oh, wait.
Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism was not holy writ, or based on any scientific model, social science or otherwise. It was propaganda of the kind favored by National Review. I wrote about its flaws here: http://clarespark.com/2010/03/10/jonah-goldbergs-liberal-fascism-part-one/. (There was no part two)
Heaven forbid we should really have a totalitarian government in this country. If we do, it won’t be coming from nutritionists keeping up with the latest scientific data, but from reactionaries who don’t know much history or think that history is irrelevant.
I’m pretty sure there must have been some selection within different ethnic groups for those who thrived on the foods available within their geographic areas. It could involve genetic variations or it could involve the microbiome. With greater wealth and a globalized selection of foods as well as more interbreeding among these groups, much has changed about what we can and should eat. I trust none of the dieticians or food-fad-of-the-month authors. I also find feminists who think women are more fulfilled inspecting kindergarten lunches than cooking for their own kids to be part of the problem because they ignore all the hormonal and emotional responses of the child (and father) and the mother who feeds them. These, in turn, affect food choices, behaviour, and the building of interpersonal relationships.
We have let a bunch of so-called experts and activists try to prolong our lives by making the life we have miserable as we read package labels and count calories. But, on the other hand, we have given jobs to some of the truly dumb.
Yes, you have it right. They will force us to live longer whether we want to or not. And you will be healthy whether you like it or not.
We will all live longer but who will want to. Bleh!
There is no proof at all, zero, zilch, nada, that the FDA diet will prolong life.
Kris. There are worse things than dying. Living under totalitarian rule isn’t living, it’s enslavement. Living a few more years because the government mandates your diet doesn’t give you much profit, if you die without
your life sanctified by God. Dying with Jesus is finding life.
Good point, vb. How many Asian Americans do you know who can’t drink the now-state-required milk because they are lactose intolerant? And compare early photographs and illustrations of Native Americans and Pacific Islanders to today’s members of these groups.
The historical record shows quite clearly that on their traditional diets, these people were far leaner, muscular and fitter than their descendants who now consume diets they were not evolved to handle.
By imposing a one-size-fits-all dietary regimen, the statist food police hamstrings parents from using their knowledge of their traditions, their insight into the special needs/tastes of their children to assure the child’s proper development.
So much for the left’s much-vaunted “diversity.” But then, to the Progressive, “Diversity” begins and ends with race. Their is no place in their regimented world for the diversity of opinion, behavior, — and now, diet.
Dear Lord, give us the strength, stamina, patience and wisdom we’re going to need to undo everything — and I mean EVERYTHING — the leftists have ever touched!
Article written by a food version of global warming hysteria. Grains and seeds are the foundation of human civilization. Now they are bad for us. Idiocy at PJM.
Try reading up on Gobekli Tepe: a Neolithic temple in Turkey that’s 12,000 years old. Excavations at the site show that the people who built it were hunter-gatherers, that they mostly ate meats of all types, and there was no water supply within 3 miles so they weren’t living there before the building got started. However, genetics show that the first grains cultivated by humans originated within 60 miles of that site, and that apparently people began to grow grain because they had to stay in one place for so long to get the temple built. Grain consumption therefore apparently began as a supplement to the meat diet of the people who were building the temple, since they couldn’t follow the herds if they were stuck building their temple. In any event, humans only began consuming grain in large quantities within the last 12,000 years. Interestingly, all domestic cats can be traced to 5 cats in the Near East, that moved in with humans 9,000 years ago when they began to store enough grain to supply a steady diet of rodents to the cats.
Although humans (and cats) will alter their behavior/diet according to the local food supply selection, it is still the case that humans evolved for thousands of years on a mostly-meat diet, and a grain-based diet is only a recent aberration. We really aren’t adapted to it, “civilization” notwithstanding.
Actually the first grain that were being cultivated and harvested was barley. This in turn was likely being used in the production of beer which was used as a currency to pay workers to build early stone works projects like the temple you mentioned. Not only did this make water safe for long term storage but it also converted the sugars into alcohol which is why diabetes and tooth decay continued to not be a problem for early man despite the cultivation of grains. Beer was the seed kernel to early civilization.
Long live Sam Adams…
Grains and seeds are the foundation of human civilization. Now they are bad for us.
Why would you assume that what is good for civilization is also good for the health of the individuals within it? There’s no logical basis to do so.
Human agriculture and herding is a relatively recent invention. Prior to that, like Marie above states, humans survived by hunting and gathering – meat, nuts, fruits in season, wild vegetables and tubers and very little grains or milk. Today’s “balanced” diet is a modern invention. No one knows what its effect is on longevity or health based on race or group.
Humans are adaptable. The original human diet did not include grains. “Seeds” as in sunflower-type seeds were part of the original diets (plural), depending on region and availability. An assumption is being made that humans must have the original diet for optimum health. Not necessarily, but it certainly is a perfectly valid way to go, and herein lies the valiidity of challenging “food pyramids” and “food nazis:” personal nutritional choices. There are many different kinds of “good” diets, but the FDA school lunch program, which has expanded to restricting what kind, and even if, children can bring food from home, makes no allowances for all those different options. The need for a balanced meal, for instance, is a myth. As to grains and civilization: grains were processed differently in ancient times when being converted into bread or groats; the nutritional value of these ancient grain derivatives was greater than modern bread. With the exception of sourdough, those ancient processes have been lost. This doesn’t make modern cereal products “bad,” but they can be problematic: more and more we are finding out that a grain-heavy diet eaten by sedentary people who live much longer than in the ancient past will often lead to adult onset diabetes. Sugar is still the bigger culprit, but grain-derived refined flour products aren’t much better.
People should have choices, and so should their kids during their growing years.
And I should add: This article pointed out that the nutritional guidelines are driven by food industry pressure. Can I assume that you, Gary, are not in favor of business interests dictating what governemtn agencies should do?
Actually, they (grains) are (bad for us).
While grains are the foundation of human civilization because they enabled production of greater amounts of food and storage of surpluses for longer periods of time, they have also always been worse for us.
Rates of malnutrition and starvation went up as people settled down and switched to agriculture due to the combination of increasing population and failed harvests.
All of the great famines and plagues of known history are attributable to failures in the grain harvest or storage, and not to failures in keeping sufficient herd animals.
All of the great social and technological leaps have come about either during the recovery periods following population contractions when meat consumption soared because there were fewer people available to engage in agriculture, or when the base technology had advanced to the point that fewer people were required for agriculture and more could engage in animal husbandry.
The key is understanding that the same shovel useful for excavating the foundations of a house is less than useful in building the actual house.
The same applies to the grains that set the foundations for civilization, while other foodstuffs are more effective in building, maintaining, and advancing it.
We don’t have to stop eating them, anymore than we should have stopped eating other foodstuffs just because someone paid the government to tell us to
Well, Elena Kagan’s response is precisely what we conservatives have been warning about: Many liberals want to use the Commerce Clause to re-engineer society.
I have often asked liberals if Soviet Communism would be constitutional. That is, is there ANYTHING in the U.S. Constitution that would prohibit a Soviet-style communist regime, as long as it came with a Gorbachev-style “glasnost” policy that would allow freedom of expression?
I have never gotten an answer. Evidently it never occurred to them.
Actually, I have gotten an answer. Liberals don’t think the “economic rights” you’re worried about are important. Their definition of freedom concerns reproductive rights and rights that Mary Steyn calls “tertiary rights,” such as the right to free contraceptives and the right to have union dues taken directly out of your paycheck. To them, it’s more about who you are free to live with than about where you’re free to live, so long as Congress made the law to address some “important” problem. In constitutional law terms, SCOTUS may apply a rational basis test to laws abridging enumerated rights, but must apply strict scrutiny if emanations from penumbras are interfered with.
It occurred to me that this is why they go so nuts when we say they should just pay for their own contraceptives out of their own pockets, rather than force Catholic hospitals to pay for them. Their definition of freedom is very, very limited, so any imagined infraction takes away a huge percentage of it.
lots of countries have the same constitution as the united states. it’s all in the implementation.
I’m with Instapundit on this one:
Tar. Feathers.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident” means you don’t care what the hell the gov’t says on this one. There is a limit and this easily rises to that standard. The school should be told in no uncertain terms that neither the child or parent has agreed to some kind of subservience to total education and control but merely academic education. I’ll raise the kids myself, thank you.
I believe (but am not positive) my limit was reached when they started busting lemonade stands.
You mean when some doddering old tool of a woman unsuccessfully tried to hold an ice cold lemonade between her bare legs while in a soapbox derby car and sued the little girls for 1 million balls of string?
Your outrage is well-placed, nonetheless you must be careful about your sub-headline. From the article:
“When the girl came home with her lunch untouched, her mother wanted to know what she ate instead. Three chicken nuggets, the girl answered. Everything else on her cafeteria tray went to waste.”
It would seem that her home-brought lunch was not confiscated.
PJM can do better.
no her lunch wasn’t confiscated, they just intimidated (read terrified) a four year old girl to the extent she didn’t eat anything. how long will it be before she is not hesitant to open her lunch bag for fear of being singled out as the child with the politically incorrect lunch (and in relation politically incorrect parents). this is the most appalling thing i have read in a long time. the government has NO RIGHT to FORCE their thinking on us. this is fascism bordering on totalitarianism.
I agree entirely. We have rapidly gone from a government that seeks to educate and encourage good habits to one that regulates good habits. This whole issue with school lunch which has cropped up in different states actually seems to be more geared to encourage parents to give up preparing their own child’s lunch. I’m sure that the SEIU is very grateful that more cafeteria workers find jobs as “nutrition” programs are expanded in schools.
Absolutely right, GGM. The underlying objective of all Democrat-inspired government regulations is to expand and grow government (new Democrat voters).
If she came home with her original lunch, it means she was told in no uncertain terms not to eat it. Seriously, how did you not get that? Do you actually think that “but it wasn’t confiscated” is a valid argument?
It’s this kind of lame rationalizing that allows soft despotism to grow. Thanks a lot, dude.
In Thomas Sowell’s masterpiece The Vision of the Anointed, he notes that in innumerable cases where conservatives have predicted that some liberal proposal would, if implemented, lead to wildly undesirable consequences, they’ve been pooh-poohed beforehand, and given no credit for their foresight afterward. While of course, the liberals who predicted all manner of good consequences which never arrived were permitted to excuse themselves on the grounds of “many factors.”
How much longer shall we tolerate such duplicitousness?
It will go on as long as the entitlement mentality thrives. Just think how many parents out there are heaving a huge sigh of relief thinking they no longer have to fix little Suzie’s lunch because the school is going to take care of it for them.
As long as the Unholy Trinity of propaganda and indoctrination (mass media, academia, entertainment/Hollywood) are in the hands of the small c communists, Francis.
If the cult controls the messaging, it controls the distortion as well.
Excellent points. In other words if you’re a progressive and you “predict” your actions will be good and work for the better than the zealots on the left will believe it, even though similar claims have always failed. But if you are a conservative and you try to explain that the progressives will destroy the country you will be attacked attack you.
I well remember a time in the early ’30′s, when I took a rolled-up pancake with some brown sugar inside for my lunch. Walked nearly a mile to school in below zero weather. I’ve passed my 90th year. If that child were mine, she’d never put a foot inside a school again. Our government has not only failed us, it has become so invasive that to alter it now needs action I hesitate to offer. However: READY……AIM……FIRE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It appears the elites desire to become prison wardens and government bureaucrats prison guards. What a terrible way to live your life. Welcome to Alcatraz.
DAIRY shouldn’t even be a ‘requirement’ because of hormones in the milk that can cause cystic acne, allergies and intolerance. Eggs are also a known allergen.
These people who make up rules on a whim are friggin’ idiots.
HOME SCHOOL ftw.
Expect an all out Progressive assault on Home Schoolers! Independent thinking cannot be tolerated.
It’s not at a “whim”. They make these regulations to enhance the industries that support their politics.
Taylor Caldwell was a writer in the fifties and sixties who forsaw very correctly where the Ameican State was heading. She saw the rise of the government bureaucrats and social engineers leading to a distopia. In her famous DEVILS ADVOCATE she poses a story where the controller of the American State working for the corrupt government is really a freedom loving patriot who has figured the best way to get people to wake up is to keep turning the screw tighter and tighter until they rise up against the tyranny. The control of schoolchilrens lunches might be one of these instances where the American populace has to be pushed and pushed until it sees what the Obama regime is really doing. Let us cheer on the tyranny of the present government in hope that it will spark and real American Revolution and restore dignity and freedom or is it too late; the Americans seemed to be too fat and too dumb and too absorbed in the bread circuses culture?
Well, Johann, you and Caldwell have an excellent idea, …. theoretically.
“a freedom loving patriot who has figured the best way to get people to wake up is to keep turning the screw tighter and tighter until they rise up against the tyranny. … Let us cheer on the tyranny of the present government in hope that it will spark and real American Revolution and restore dignity and freedom …”
The problem is that it will not work (HAS not worked).
“… or is it too late?”
The answer to that question is an unequivocal “YES!”
What will happen is that tyranny will increase. The speed of that increase is the only question.
No one will do any effective thing to arrest the accelerating descent into an abject tyranny under a despotic police-state. Neither elected officials, nor the courts. Nor the States, nor their people. Nor the rich, nor the poor. Nor you, nor I. Nobody.
If you and I do not come to live under despotic tyranny; our children and grandchildren certainly will. And they will, rightfully, curse us.
There are only five fates remaining to Americans:
1) Cowardly flight to temporary safety (available only to those with the means to accomplish it);
2) Death;
3) Imprisonment;
4) Slavery; or,
…
5) Becoming the administrator/enforcer of one of the first 4 fates upon others (i.e. becoming part of the tyranny)
Freedom cannot die so long as it lives on in the hearts of men. Those whose refuge is the God of Israel always have and always will outlast the tyrants who seek to stamp them out. Evil will have its hour, but the Risen Lord abides forever, and there is not a thing the enemy can do to us that He cannot reverse. Perhaps martyrdom lies in our future and perhaps it doesn’t, but whether we live or die we must do so for the Lord. I cannot say whether there will be a United States of America when Jesus returns, but I can say that no USA that we recognize will endure the time of great distress that is coming upon the whole Earth. That time will be mankind’s darkest hour, but the Sun of Righteousness will break that darkness and bring forth the dawn that will never end, for Christ is the Morningstar that never sets.
I agree, Myth Buster. I was speaking more in an earthly context.
In any case, martyrdom may still be some ways off; but our PENANCE is upon us. We can accept the punishment with repentance and faith, thereby becoming refined — or we can just get our @$$e$ punished.
Also, I phrased my first comment as if I knew the future absolutely. I’m no prophet, I’m just weighing the odds. And what I described seems to me to be about 99% likely — I just don’t see a way around it.
There’s always freedom, and there’s always hope. I just can’t see pretending that a hope of about 1% is actually a hope of around 60% (as many people who should know better seem to be doing these days).
I’m glad you brought it to a more spiritual level, though; because I don’t believe that Barack Obama (nor Michelle) is our problem. The problem isn’t Obama, Pelosi, SCOTUS, Reid, etc. …. the problem is the stain on the soul of America that can’t be bleached out just by voting Obama out of the White House. One election season will not return us to a Constitutional Republic, nor restore God-given rights already usurped.
We are surrounded by tyranny. Its the TSA grabbing and groping you just because you want to get on an airplane; not that they think you are a terrorist. Its in the school lunch nazis. Who gave them the right to override mom’s lunch decision. Its in the Kelo Decision which say private developers have a greater right to your property than you do. Its in card check because you lose your secret ballot in union elections. This leaves you naked and bare against the union bullies. Its in the Wisc. recall elections, because the unions lost, they are basically trying to overturn the election. Its in the EPA turning off the water in the Central Valley, turning the farms to dust bins. Its in the NLRB telling Boeing they can’t open their factory in North Carolina. Its in the college speech codes because it supresses you right to speak openly and freely.
Where is “our” Rosa Parks?
Busily awaiting her next benefit, oblivious to the fact that she’s sitting on the back of the bus, again.
Since our Leftard “betters” seem to find all sorts of rights lurking in the penumbra of the Constitution, they won’t mind our implementing that “recall provision” the Founders were pretty plain about finding in the Second Amendment.
And yet, conservatives have been generally sanguine about zero tolerance policies and drug policies like prison-style lock downs. Sorry, but if this is what gets you on your high horse, you’re too late to the game to have any credibility.
You could add the government mandated vaccine schedule to your list of things conservatives are largely sanguine (if by sanguine you mean vociferously supportive of) about.
“Zero-tolerance” policies have been despised and ridiculed by right-wingers for decades. Dunno where you’ve been.
Smoking pot, perhaps?
Yeah, that’s why not a single one of them has taken concrete steps to actually do anything about it.
You’re correct. Most mainstream consrvatives and Republicans do not grasp the complete lack of credibility they have. I’m not sure what the philosophical basis is for opposing this intrusion when you accept the drug war, mandated vaccines, TSA and Homeland Security, the Patriot Act, interventionist foreign policy and endless war, TARP and so forth.
The Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama era has been one of a seemless governance philiosophy. Whatever the present “crisis” may be, the only action is to increase the size and scope of the federal government and to force the citizens to submit to the authority of the state. Conservatives cheer and support actions taken to “enhance security” or support “law and order” and those heroes that “keep us safe” no matter how criminal an individual police officer’s specific actions may be. When objecting to the totalitarian security/warfare state on constitutional grounds we’re told “the Constitution was never ment to be a suicide a pact.” (like the Dems say, It’s a living document”)
No, the conservatives and Republicans don’t really object to the totalitarian authority of the state as a matter of principle, they mearly think they can manage it better than the liberals.
On the nose!
“…toxic…state…” if people begin to regard the state as toxic, so much the better. California pays with IOUs – toxic. Illinois is a deadbeat customer to her vendors – toxic. The fed controls every electron orbiting your existence – toxic. We have these control-freaks b/c most people want it; the politicians will never turn this around w/o pissed-off voters.
If the ballot box fails we still have another box to choose from…
Reality: The school was hard up for a buck twenty five.
Follow the money. The most important part of this story is the money. They can pass all of the laws they want to pass in DC, but it requires the on-the-ground agents to actually enact and enforce those laws.
This case worker could have ignored what was in the bag. No one would have ever known, nor cared, if they had. The only reason, and I mean only reason, this case worker made a big deal out of this is because the school wants the money.
This is like the school equivalent of stop light cameras.
Is there a better way to end the fiasco of the public school than to chase away concerned parents and intelligent children? I think we can agree that there are many mothers out there who could care less about their children, but rather than forcing the food police onto all children, maybe it would be best to school the neglected children in another building. The public schools don’t seem to know where to draw the line. Diversity in the classroom was a big mistake, eh?
And where were those “concerned mothers” when they were told that if their children are physically assaulted, they’ll be suspended for fighting if they defend themselves? Do they care more about their kids’ nutrition than physical safety?
Concerned parents, in greater numbers, are home schooling. This of course requires at least one income sufficient to meet the family needs and a lot of dedication. A single parent has few options.
I guess that I will have to stop working on establishing a vegetarian, ecology focused charter school here in my community. Darn!
chuckle Sounds like PJM’s rocket guru is lost in space.
Next he’ll expect the government to require that religious institutions provide services which their faith finds immoral.
What are you talking about?
1. From the post: “I guarantee you this: when this program – whatever the devil it is – was first proposed, someone said it will lead to inspectors demanding to see what’s in kid’s lunches, and insisting they eat something else instead of what mom sent. And the critic got a cold, withering look from the good people in charge. Really. I think that’s a little overboard.”
2. “chuckle Sounds like PJM’s rocket guru is lost in space. Next he’ll expect the government to require that religious institutions provide services which their faith finds immoral.”
OK, that made even less sense the second time than it did the first.
He’s talking about the Catholic Church being ordered to purchase contraceptives for women when Catholic doctrine from the beginning was that contraception is a sacrilege against marriage.
Obviously the people who make up these rules have never raised a 5 year old. You can pack them anything but then try and get them to eat something they do not want. Over time nearly all kids do just fine with a little common sense.
There is evidence that school obesity programs increase the incidence of eating disorders in children.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120124151207.htm
Actually I have an idea for a good experiment. Prepare healthy balanced dinners according to guidelines. Set them in front of young children at home. Give them 30 minutes to eat everything and leave the room from time to time.
Weigh the family dog at the start and then one month later and see what happens.
Brilliant. LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I’m swiping tears of laughter!
Bwahahahahaha!
Better yet, read “Good Calories, Bad Calories” by Gary Taubes. Very heavily researched and scientific and a real eye opener as to what really is a healthy diet.
Also (or) read his more recent book published last year: “Why We Get Fat and What to Do About It.”
Better yet go to the source and read some Weston Price. Gary Taubes is a low-carb zealot who has so wrecked his own glucose metabolism that he can’t eat a handful of blueberries anymore.
Our new food overlords always seem to forget that food is not nutritious – even their superlunches – unless it is acually eaten. The kid knows this, instinctively, and she chose to eat what appealed to her and tossed what didn’t. That’s what kids do.’
The parents know this also. They prepared a lunch that was pretty darn goo with or without govt strictures, but based on the most pressing question: What will m daughter eat?
Much is annoying about this. To me another irritant is that the school didn’t give a crap if their prescribed food was or wasn’t eaten. That the kid was given it was all they cared about. And the child ends up with fewer calories and nutrients. This is the problem with government in a nutshell.
Where does it end? What if there is an elderly couple living on Food Stamps. What if the Federal Government determines that anybody over the age of 70 should not get Food Stamps because the funds would be “wasted” on people that old? Should we just let old people die because they can’t contribute as much to society? Well, according to the laws we now have, the Federal Government has ever right to do that. And once you stop food, why not drugs? These old people seem to need so much medication. Why not simply give them a few pain killers and let them die as soon as possible? And let’s not even go into whether or not elderly people should qualify for expensive operations. This is where it all leads, America. The power of the state will not only regulate what you eat, but what medicine you can have and what operations will be “given” to you.
If the Supreme Court does not declare Obamacare unconstitutional, we will be facing perhaps the most important election in American history. Do we allow the people to maintain at least some freedom, or do we give in to the horrors of the social-welfare state. And we can all see how well THAT is playing out in Europe right now. This is it, America. Time to stand tall if we want to stand for anything at all. Americans during the American Revolution had to fight for their freedom. All you have to do is vote. Time to make a big change in November and vote Obama out of office. If not, that kid’s experience in the lunch room could be your future. And you know it.
Horrors of the social-welfare state? Please tell me one of them. The more I read PJMedia, American Thinker the more I am convinced that we have here in Europe much more freedoms than you have in the USA. Some government official coming to tell us what we can eat? Seems that you live in a police state. We are satisfied what we have created and built here in Northern Europe during centuries and under harsh conditions. Never had we slavery here. Sorry but we don’t see very much good in the american “freedom” and please, before you frighten people about social-welfare state, find out what it is to live in such a state.
Not in my lifetime, my ancestors left that backwater place in the 1600′s and decidedly never looked back. I want nothing of Europe, and need nothing from it. We’ve bailed your collective backsides out enough. I for one would vote against helping ever again. With put the United States and it’s freedoms you would be nothing at all.
Suomi on PJ Media? Hey!
“Please tell me one of them.”
Over taxation and regulation; little disposable income, limited access to healthcare, high VAT on goods and service, etc…
“Seems that you live in a police state.”
The Obama administratoin is doing it’s best.
“We are satisfied what we have created and built here in Northern Europe..”
Finland. White homogenous country of 5 million who are 95% Lutheran and have a language that is hard to master. It’s the only place I have seen where socialism works.
“.. before you frighten people about social-welfare state, find out what it is to live in such a state.”
I have. It sucks, in my opinion, but to each his own.
PS- I do enjoy visiting your country.
Sorry. Didn’t identify myself.
Thanks for your spesific answer. You are welcome to visit Finland.
I do not agree with you that we have “limited access to healthcare”. What do you mean? We have general and cheap access to health care for all. Of course we pay taxes for that. But we have shared risk and responsibility and that is right, especially for those who have not succeeded so well. Everybody cannot win. There are winners and also losers in life, some are strong and some are not without their own reason. If we build a society only for winners, we surely get an unjust world.
“where socialism works”. Socialism in Finland? Please explain. What do you mean buy “socialism”?. High taxes? My income tax rate is about twenty per cent. Is that a characteristic of a horror state? Soviet Union was a horror state, but to compare Soviet Union to Finland is unfair.
Our family friend who lives in USA came here to give birth to a child because it would have cost 3000 USD in USA and here it cost about 100 USD.
We have never had socialism in Finland and will never have.
I’m not convinced your country is paradise, Free Finn. After all, you “enjoy” one of the highest alcoholism rates in the world, and a far higher suicide rate than we do. In spite of your generous welfare benefits, your birth rate doesn’t meet population replacement levels, even with a higher illegitimacy rate.
I’ll stick with what we have over here, thanks.
I’ve never thought we live in a paradise. You also have one of the highest or is it the highest criminality rate in the whole world. Your Ineguality-adjusted Human Development Index in 2011 was 0.771 when Finland had 0.833. You were below such country as Slovakia and certainly below most developed countries of Europe.
“Criminality”? Isn’t that a nice catch-all term. Care to be more specific?
Because if you are going by the sheer number of crimes committed here in the States as opposed to the number committed in Finland, well….duh. Of course we’re going to have more. We’ve got over 300 million people here. We’ve got more people here illegally than you have in your entire country.
We don’t have the highest murder rate (your cousins, the Estonians, beat us on that), we don’t have the highest burglary rate (Denmark, Austria, Sweden and Iceland are higher), we aren’t the highest in assaults (Sweden, again, has more per capita), and Finnish women are more likely to be raped than American women. For all the talk about gun violence here, we’re not the world leaders in murders with a firearm, either.
We are the undisputed leader in car thefts, and we do have a high incarceration rate. True. But I’d rather be leading in those categories than the ones I mentioned in the second paragraph….especially in the second to last sentence.
It’s ok if you managed to destroy your freedom yet call it still “freedom” -if you are happy with it.
Just stop bitching against the hand that kept you free and kept Europe of being finlandized (lol)
“bitching against the hand that kept you free”
We fought Winter War practically alone against an enemy of almost twenty times more powerful without Finland becoming occupied. The following war that began after the Winter War, was not so glorious but again the Soviet Union could not occupy our country. We are not in debt of gratitude to America about the independence of our country. If you mean that America liberated Europe during WWII please keep in mind that the Soviets had already crushed the Germans in the east and the defeat of Germany was sure when you entered the war. You didn’t fight the war against Soviet Union. Soviet Union, our enemy, was your ally.
You seem to have fun laughing at Finland. You can have your fun. For centuries we have had to live in the neighbourhood of a much more powerful and often hostile country that has brought on us not fun but weeping and destruction. In spite of that we have managed to preserve our independence also during the hard times of the cold war. We never wanted and never belonged to Soviet Bloc.
Free Finn, you didn’t exactly hold off the Russians singlehandedly. You did have assistance from a, shall we say, Teutonic source that was running rampant around the continent at the time. Your country did manage to secure their assistance without officially being occupied, however, so I guess you can keep repeating the lie and feel comfortable about it.
Your soldiers fought rather, um, valiantly, for them in a specially dedicated SS unit. Yes, I know….you were the only ones who were part of the SS who NEVER engaged in war crimes. Uh huh. Talk to some Russians about Division Wiking and get back to me, ok? Sorry, wait a minute. They aren’t here to talk about that, are they?
That’s ok, this will tell their story and that of many others. Enjoy learning your history, Free Finn.
http://blog.hitlersforeignexecutioners.com/2012/02/the-finnish-waffen-ss/
No.
Without the American military weight it was just a matter of time before URSS -now nuclear- tried again.
The Euro-indoctrination seems to work well on you. The whole continent of Europe and Asia, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, was continually over-run by barbarians for millenims, totally sacking and enslaving people before Constitutional Republics became the norm and super-powers like The U.S. offered protection. Now the Europeans can sit back, while the weapons of America are trained on their enemies (except for the Islamic invasion they stupidly allowed on themselves) and BRAG ABOUT HOW WONDERFUL THERE LIVES ARE, HOW PEACEFUL THEY ARE, HOW ENLIGHTENED AND PROGRESSIVE THEY ARE! “PRIDE GOETH BEFORE A FALL”. THAT’S IN THE BIBLE FINN IF YOU CAN FIND ONE BEFORE THEY REMOVE THEM ALL IN YOUR ELITIST-HEATHEN COUNTRY!
To Malinse: Finland has not been continually over-run by barbarians for milleniums. We were under Swedish rule from 1150 AD to 1809 AD, under Russian rule, but with our own autonomy from 1809 to 1917 and independent from that time on. The Swedish were not barbarians. The time of Russian rule was not all the time so bad because we had autonomy and at least before the so called Oppression Period in the end of 19th century. The time of Russian rule was not however a time of barbarity.
I agree with you that “Pride goeth before a fall” and surely we are Gentiles as also you are. But if you suggest that I am an unbeliever, in that you are wrong and it has not been my intention to be arrogant.
To Lili von Shtupp: I apologize, USA is not leading in “criminality” rate. There are third world countries and other that are ahead. In intentional homicide rate per 100000 inhabitants according to latest statistics you are at 5.0, Estonia is at 7.1 and that is not our fault, Russia at 15 and we are at 2.3.
You didn’t notice that I wrote about the Winter war where we fought alone. I did write about “not so glorious” succeeding war and that was just because Germany was “with us”. However do you have suggestions what we should have done, when another superpower in the year 1940 after the terrible experience of the Winter War, consistently threatened our independence? Nevertheless, in my opinion, it was a shame to us to fight together with Germany. To speak of war crimes, are you really willing for that?
This kind of food fascism absolutely is not new and it’s worse than you think. My wife directed a private preschool at a Methodist Church in the 1990s. Because it was a preschool, and not a mothers’ day out program, it had to be licensed by the state of Tennessee.
The Faustian bargain was simply this: in exchange for being granted the preschool license, Cathy had to submit the school to total control by the State for everything except curriculum (presumably because it was a church preschool the State did not dictate that).
And yes, inspectors did come to the preschool and peer into the kids’ lunch bags to make sure lunches from home met federal guidelines – at a private school. And in the crib room inspectors counted the ratio of Caucasian dolls to black dolls to make sure that babies’ playthings were ethnically diverse (I kid you not). And there were other such inspections.
The State awarded star ratings on how well a preschool conformed to what the State wanted. Three stars was the highest, and failure to conform not only meant a school lost stars, it could lose its license altogether, which is to say it could be put out of business.
That we arrived at this point has almost nothing to do with whether Democrats or Republicans are in office. After all, it was GW Bush who promoted and signed NCLB, the most intrusive and controlling federal legislation of education ever.
It has everything to do with den Beste’s law:
That’s where we have been for a long, long time.
It is too late.
Rand Simberg, The incident you describe is nothing less than the Federal Government Beating up on a preschooler! It is so bad that to quote you, “The girl’s mother — who said she wishes to remain anonymous to protect her daughter from retaliation.” Let me emphasize, RETALIATEION!!! How many other children have been thusly abused? All the other abuses pale into insignificance!!! Your characterization of the incident, ” . . . And as tyranny goes, the school-lunch incident is relatively petty.” Relatively petty, to you and the Gov, but, I suspect more than a bit threatening to the mother and her child! I bet she buys her perscribed meal and understands it is TO HER to obey!
I was a police officer for 20 years. If I was trying to find drugs, guns or a bomb, I needed to get a search warrant. Now, government agents can search any thing or any place looking for a “Twinkie” with no warrant or reasonable suspicion? How did we ever get so screwed up?
Stop bitching..START LOADING.
Think of the bigger picture of a 4 year old being told her mother is a bad person who gave her bad food. Check out a publication called from Cradle to College – it’s a pretty scary manifesto for taking parents out of their children’s lives and decision making processes.
I know the answer….Homeschool! It worked for Jefferson. And Washington. And Lincoln. And most of the founding Fathers.
Except the right to teach/bring up your children after your own conscience is under heavy fire.
Isn’t that what this is about? Just another thing that we really should leave to the government, because they know so much better than we do. And if we don’t like it, tough luck.
The road to slavery looks to be slick, steep, and soft- it doesn’t sink in until you are so far along, so quickly, that you aren’t quite sure what to do to get out of it.
We’ll have to make do with the ballot box this coming fall.
Given how the current president came to be, I’m not convinced that the current crop of voters is a group to put a lot of faith in to do the right thing…
Years ago,when I read still read the New York Times, I was appalled by a story that a Nutritionist had convinced a class that the food packed by parents was poisoning them. As Daniel Derrida put it:Schools, like prisons, are “Total Institutions”
Even private schooling may not be the answer. The HHS rule quoted in the article requires even in-home day care to abide by the guidelines.
This is simply another Obama administration outrage that’s getting traction at this moment and will probably disappear in a few days, allowed to die by a citizenry and a Congress that can’t seem to find the will to mount a sustained counter-attack and buried by the complicit MSM. Fast & Furious, Solyndra, recess appointments when there’s no recess, the Federal government strong-arming religion into submission, bureaucrats dictating what parents can feed their children……..the lists goes on and on. Each time a new atrocity is revealed I think “this will be the final straw” and each time the outrage dissipates and the Administration is emboldened.
Welcome to the principles of affirmative action as they apply to this POTUS & his administration. Most (if not all) of us who have worked outside the home have experienced first-hand the traditional use of a double standard when it comes to the way employers approach the issue of AA beneficiaries’ quality of work; NTS these people typically get away with all sorts of things non-beneficiaries of AA can get away with. May Obama be the last AA POTUS this country ever elects.
What kind of “parent” would send their child to a public “school”?
but, if you get enough kids eating school lunch- they are the majority. and they are unsocialized little sh**s. and they make fun of the kids who bring lunch from home? You know this, right?
My kids attend a subsidized school lunch majority school- 79.8% school lunches- if they find two more kids- they trigger title whatever, and get more funds—
the school lunch kids make fun of the home-food kids. My kids, poor critters, had different approaches. One sat with the same four home meal kids for years, even though they weren’t friends. The other begged for six months of school lunches, which, honestly, really was a sacrifice- husband is in financial services- the meltdown industry for the last few years-we were paying full- freight- we were spending more on him than all the others combined- and the little girl has whole groups of friends with home meals- the economy melted enough that other moms stay home now. She also sometimes asks for money for lunch, to show she’s “cool.” She’s in first grade.
For the others- I went and complained to the assistant principal. You have no idea how harsh her reaction was. Her children had been subject to the same jeering-same reasons- ten years earlier. It’s the first time I’d heard the word “shiftless” coming out of the mouth of a real person, instead of simply on the page. She was talking about the parents.
I sat down with my kids, after that, and talked more openly about social shame, living on the dole, and why they should be proud of their dad, for keeping them from school lunches. It was heinous, explaining this to kids whose friends lived in public housing- that there were differences. I had to point out how fat the school lunch kids were, too. I hated having to do that, name-calling, shaming, social classing stuff….they need an innocent childhood. If those stupid kids hadn’t been trying to shame my kids…….
I had to explain they wore uniform clothes b/c we are planning to send them to college, that their dad is building a business, that their father takes his lunch- and that he gets made fun of by other employees. Not his equal peers in his job- but the people underneath him. The other guys building businesses on commission, who’d read “Millionaire Next Door,” or who’d listened to him when he broke out the calculator….the ones with a plan for future prosperity….they did a lot more growing up a little earlier than I’d wished.
and, honestly, the assistant principal- she’s a democrat. I don’t know that another Reagan couldn’t peel working Democrats away, b/c of stuff like this. She’s seen it with her own eyes. I know I was a lot fuzzier and kinder before now.
“but, if you get enough kids eating school lunch- they are the majority. and they are unsocialized little sh**s. and they make fun of the kids who bring lunch from home? You know this, right?”
Thank you for that.
The school knows it too. This is all about shaming kids and parents to comply. It will cause untold psychological damage and food issues which will scar many children for life.
This is not about children’s health. It is about control. They want you and your children to feel bad for not conforming. Do not let them do that.
My daughter’s school (Public Washington DC charter school) has the same rule about lunch. They are “inspected” and everything deemed unhealthy is taken out. I was concerned at first (we’re vegetarian and the cafeteria serves nothing but meat) but it seems that the rule was put in place to prevent people bringing in “Mac Happy meals” to school. This said I stopped giving her small pieces of chocolate for desert, or cookies (even homemade)…
).
We learned to live with the restriction (she gets the chocolate after school
“We learned to live with the restriction …”
And thus are our chains forged, our bondage made more unbreakable: with our active acquiescence.
Why would you “learn to live with the restrictions”? This is an outright affront to individual freedom. How many more restrictions are we willing to learn to live with? See my post below.
Wow.
Seriously? “learn to live with . . .?”
Seriously?
Dear DcMom. It’s not about what benefit the state thinks they are providing you. The big picture is we are being conditioned to look to the government for all the answers to all our problems. It is Satanic in its inception. God doesn’t want people to replace him with a government even if the government believes it can replace God. You don’t have to be enslaved by your government. We the People are the power of a free Constitutional America. It is only through our consent that the government can rule. We can stop the tyranny if we work and vote together. But if we capitulate and let them take away our Constitutional authority then we will be done.
Alex de Tocqueville warned us that individual freedom could be overcome by a tightening web of insurmountable rules and regulations. In an abstract way, we can contemplate the scope of federal regulations, now over 80,000 pages. But it is more useful, and personal, to look at everyday examples. In recent years, the government has been able to monitor our telephone communications. Now, they are also tracking our social media posts, medical records, and financial transactions. In New York City, tens of thousands of ordinary citizens going about their business on the streets are subjected to “Stop and Frisk” tactics. Ironically, this government opposes asking illegal immigrants for proof that they are in the country legally or asking people to present some form of identification when they vote. In our homes, we are forced to use less effective dishwasher detergent, toilets, and shower heads. We are told what kind of lightbulbs we are allowed to have. Parents who pack a school lunch for their children may be told it isn’t good enough or, in some cases, their children may be forced to eat whatever the school decides to serve, like it or not. And those who enjoy the restaurant experience will be challenged to find a Happy Meal in San Feancisco, foods cooked in trans fats in New York, foie gras in Chicago, or any fast food in south Los Angeles.
We’re now being told we must buy health insurance whether we want it or not. Religious people must provide medical services they cannont morally condone. Insurance carriers are told they must provide certain products and services for free. Free speech by insurance companies has been muzzled and an attempt was made to stifle speech by military chaplains. Religious organizations were told who they could and could not fire, which was unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court. Tobacco smoking has become increasingly criminalized but, also ironically, marijuana has become more legal.
Individually, each of these restrictions might be acceptable or cause just a little grumbling. Together, they demonstrate the political genius of incrementalism. The only thing we can look forward to is the satisfaction of telling our children and grandchildren how nice it was to have lived in the freest country on earth. Yup, those were the days.
I suppose this is a great case for civil disobedience!
I just can’t wait for the first death or illness of a child they make eat something they are allergic to, but they’ll tell you that sacrifice is a part of the good for the collective. or the system had a failure that needs more money to investigate, hold hearings, rewrite policy, earmark more funds etc. etc. etc. Come on and sing along, the Government Cheese Wheel goes round and round…
Generally, Bananas are classified as two servings of fruit for children (less size = smaller amt of calories per serving)
Good thing they did not try that when I was 4 they wouold have gotten hit with the lunch box. Taking stuff away from be has been dangerous since well before that, and still is.
Maybe if we eat the gov food, we can all look like MO.
Fried Chicken Nuggets,,,HELLO
DMV policing and serving food…how lovely!
Totalitarianism can advance only in the presence of a cowed, compliant, fearful populace that has been conditioned to think it has no power of resistance.
A state of mind “progressives” are working to instill every day.
Michelle has said in the past that some parents aren’t really qualified to supervise their children’s eating and the state has to make the right choices for them as well as make private enterprise do the right thing, like put grocery stores in what she calls “food deserts” in inner cities.
Like her husband, she got a leg up through Affirmative Action. These marginally intelligent people have decided that it is they who should orchestrate the universe, they they who should bring you “health by government regulation and fiat”.
If the lunch critique happened to my child on Monday, on Tuesday we would commence home schooling.
For many years we have watched the illogical notions and actions of the Left and considered it the fringes of Democracy. It was not until just over 3 years ago that we (some) were startled into the reality that the problem was much more serious.
We always had assumed that there was a constant majority of people in the US who possessed common sense and traditional values in some predominant degree. Now we aren’t sure, and we won’t know until November 7h. It appears that the odds are very high that the majority is no longer “center right”, but now may be in the center of “couldn’t care less”.
We keep expecting people to be jarred out of their complacency by the economy, or some new attack by Socialism on the liberties we thought we had. But, instead, a few manipulated economic statistics and Obama’s approval rating shoots up; and, shocking events from the liberal bureaucracy only shock us. Let’s face it–most Americans like it easy and loose, and it’s not just the kids.
But, to be sure, when things improve, it will be because the people acted to make it better. And, at this time, it does not appear that a sufficient number of Americans know what better is. The marketing message of Socialism seems to be more appealing to most than that of freedom and individual responsibility.
I’m afraid you’re right. A limpid “recovery” will become the “new normal” that too many Americans will accept as OK.
Here’s what I would have done if it had been my child. I would have made a visit to the school, found the food inspector and pushed several of the wonderful chicken nuggets into the place that sun doesn’t shine of the food inspector. I would have advised the inspector that the process could be repeated if the first installment failed to get the appropriate message across. It is well past time that we as a nation stopped acting like sheep and send the message that we can act as stupidly as they can…or worse.
where did you get this story mother goose ?
It is appalling that any of you think parents should be required to feed their children in anyway, let alone ways you decide are healthy.
The real problem was that it wasn’t a SCHOOL lunch the little girl had… how dare her parent do that instead of buy lunch.
Tar and feathers, I had forgotten…Splendid idea!
Time for some civil disobedience. The states can’t do it because they are so firmly attached to the Federal dollar pipeline. But the Catholic bishops could. The time is now. There is every indication that Obama is just getting started.
On the subject of conservative/libertarian predictions of future overeaching being ignored, then proven right. I remember when the leftists, unfortunately joined by some stupid conservatives, all went after tobacco. Some libertarian conservatives pointed out that the same authority they used to do that could someday be used to go after junk food, and the gov would eventually be telling us all what we were allowed to eat. Their leftist opponents, and the audience, got a big laugh out of that, and how rediculous that prediction was. Now we see this happening. First they went after the smokers, but I wasn’t a smoker, so I didn’t object, then they went after ***. Basically, any of you out there that tolerated the anti smoking big gov power grab have yourselves to blame for this.
Yup! Welcome to the War on Obesity. I wonder what Republican candidate opposes such Romneycare inventions? Hint: it won’t be any that have abandoned “global warming” for “sustainable development”.
Look you can’t have it both ways. Ever since around 1970 juries have been awarding huge settlements to “victims” who said that some company didn’t do enough to protect them. We have imported trained and accepted a huge number of people in this country who are now all “victims” of something or somebody. So now the people in government see themselves as everyone’s savior and nanny.
Having said that, many, many children are going to school with junk for lunches, eat fast food at home, and stay up until midnight – not doing homework either! It’s hard to teach kids who’s bodies are fighting them so they can’t stay awake or function properly and I can sympathize with schools who want to do what’s best for the children even though I think people should take responsibility for their own lives and the lives of their children.
So, we have finally come to this: Brown Shirt Food Police snooping in children’s lunch bags! Heil, Comrade!
This is an outrage and we need to hire a new President who will assure us our Freedoms and Liberties as defined by the U S Constitution!
OUT with this corrupt, subversive regime! We have had ENOUGH!
– Pelosi.
I work in a gov’t funded pre-k. When we have pizza, the kids eat it. when it’s some oatmel bar (more pasty than tasty), it lands in the garbage and they just don’t eat. The kids are smarter about not eating the tasteless healthy stuff than the gov’t is in trying to force it on them (they have no choice to bring their own foods)> They’re allowed to serve themselves so the overweight ones eat all the starch and multi servings (the gov’t encouraging the obesity it rants about), the picky thin ones eat nothing and go to McDonald’s on the way home. I think this is all an attempt to give the obama woman something to do with her time so she seems relevant.
My theory is that this school lunch crackdown is related to the left’s baby killing social engineering desires. When would-be parents see all the hassle and resentment that must be lived with by merely having children in school this has to act as a strong discouragement to even wanting to have children in the first place. If the left is able to make parent’s lives as miserable as possible they can essentially disuade poorer working couples, or even potential unwed mothers without the means to send their kids to private schools, to not procreate in the first place. Everything from the left is laden with ulterior motive.
A free people cannot be governed unless they consent to that government. I think it’s almost time for us to show this totalitarian government WE DON’T CONSENT!!!!
This is most likely the person responsible for the Nazi Lunch Inspection:
http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?contentidonly=true&contentid=bios_rowe.xml
Note, she has not a single qualification in nutrition, health, diet, or medicine. She is a functionary of the national socialist movement and proud of it.
I can quite easily see myself challenging her authority and seeing the look of complete contempt towards me. She’s an idiot. But worse, she’s a useful idiot.
Where does one find a fascist that’s corrupt enough to head up the War on Obesity? How about a racist feminazi that worked in HR at Lockheed-Martin?
Nice find.
Had a case in Europe:
The home-made nutrition bar, containing a balanced quantity of protein, vitamins, fats and starch was rejected on the basis of it being ‘cake’ and the child forced to eat something to which it was actually allergic.
After repeated interventions by a parent, including a doctor’s letter, the child finally agreed to eat the ‘nourishing soup’ and vomited all over the teachers shoes.
That put an end to the discussion.
Rush Limbaugh said he believes that person behind this tyrannical act is Audrey Rowe who is the Administrator for the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in Washington, D.C. Check her out. Maybe say hello.
See her “resume” I linked above @ post # 61
Thanks Jay. It seems that her only quailification is that she is black and a communist. What a POS.
We are doomed as long as ignorant, self-serving heathens can vote, hold public office, and influence government. It is a direct result of rejecting God and the salvation of his Son, Jesus, from our world.
Woooah. Alright, I’m fairly conservative person. However, this had a thing to do with the Federal Government telling little suzi-poo what she has to eat for lunch. The USDA doesn’t regulate sack lunches. It does require caretakers to OFFER certain choices. What this was is an over-zealous local school district employee steping WAY out of her wheelhouse. When we conservatives blame the current administration for actions like this, or go out of our way to insult it with terms like “Obozo” we lose legitimacy. When that happens our legitiamte complaints can be painted by the liberals as paranoia.
Now, if we wanted to discuss abolishing the DOE and putting the onus for education back on the states…
Or, the fact that the U.S. Senate has faild to propose a budget for over three years, I’d be all ears…
Wow… pardon my atrocious typos. I’ll have to go back to reviewing my writting from bottom to top.
Most of you posting here have lost sight of the reason for the article and that is another infringement upon the rights of the people. Leave out the religious ideals and start paying more attention to those that are taking more and more liberties to encroach upon your constitutional rights and your childrens rights. If I eat Meat or if I am a Vegan is not the issue here, the issue is Dictatorship of those in power over those that they are suppose to be protecting from this kind of thing. Frankly idiots have been arguing and killing over God and Religion for Centuries before I was born and idiots still argue fact and fiction and kill people over it. Grow up smell the stick from the top and find a handle to flush it.