H2O MAN
 
Reply Tue 14 Feb, 2012 05:24 pm


Food Police Madness: NC School Must Approve Parent-Packed Lunches, Preschooler’s
Homemade Turkey & Cheese Sandwich Lunch Was Replaced with Cafeteria Chicken Nuggets


The Obama's need to be evicted from The White House!

  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 773 • Replies: 20
No top replies

 
Below viewing threshold (view)
Fido
 
  2  
Reply Wed 15 Feb, 2012 07:09 am
@H2O MAN,
Strange isn't it... Some parents are no better at feeding their children healthy food than the government... All that stuff about katchup being a vegitable, and now, tomato sauce on pizza is really retarded... How about: Let the scientists and nutritionists make the law, and let the schools and the government try to suppliment what are some very deficient diets if not more... Ignorance is the child of poverty... People who are not fed well enough do not learn well enough and one thing they do not learn is what makes up healthy nutrition... Do not forget that most people who are over weight are actually malnurished, and clearly suffer from emotional damage... The anxiety level among children springing from lack of support, fear of strangers, and depression about the future is criminal; but no one is talking about putting those responsible in prison... Even I would see them hung... Our children, even the obese ones are starving for a healthy society... Will you give it to them??? Will you make it possible??? Will you condone it???
H2O MAN
 
  -4  
Reply Wed 15 Feb, 2012 07:41 am
@Fido,


This parent was far better at feeding her child than Obama's government school system
and both she and her daughter are being punished for being better... strange isn't it.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Feb, 2012 08:02 am
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:



This parent was far better at feeding her child than Obama's government school system
and both she and her daughter are being punished for being better... strange isn't it.
Like Gurtrude Stein said: A Bureaucracy is an Bureaucracy... Marx said that children need protection from their parents; and of course, he said that because of the obvious abuses and neglect of children so common during the industrial revolution, what with mothers driven by hunger to work, or children themselves sold into a virtual wage slavery by necessity, and their parents... Ultimately, Captialism would not be possible without the protection given to it be a blanket of laws, and these laws which empower the wealthy at the expense of the poor, also rob the poor of the defense of their communities... They do empower the law machine, and the government, but in breaking down communites, community protection and support, the ability of the community to police its own, and to judge its own is lost, so that parents and relatives have less of rights, less of responsibility, less control, and more unhappiness... The law, treating all, even children as individuals is empowered, but it creates far more problems than it solves...

Primitves never had the legal problems we do... They settled their issues with a Moot, or a Doom, or a Thing; which was both government and court of the people... Or they settled their matters back and forth with vengeance... In Anglo Saxon England, no one could even get away with killing in self defense without some payment of blood money...When we call ourselves a people of law, it is in recognition of the fact that not a fraction of the injustice endured by the mass of society, that makes possible all great wealth and private ownership of the commonwealth would be possible without the protection of law, which is really the protection the rich and powerful seek against those suffering injustice... And there is no end to it.. The more law we have the more we need... The more police we need to protect the rich, the more we become a police state... Law without justice is not law; but it will still be called law, and will still be enforced as law, and in this fashion law is denied the protection the sense of justice would give to it... Some day all the abused and exploited people will lump the rich and their class of law makers and enforcers in the same bag, and throw them all into the river like so many mewing kittens, and it is because the use of law to further injustice and to break up families and communities has robbed law of its meaning... ....
H2O MAN
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 15 Feb, 2012 08:07 am
@Fido,


It's clear that all US citizens need protection from Obama's big government.

Americans must stand up against this kind of bullshit and vote Obama out of office.
H2O MAN
 
  -4  
Reply Wed 15 Feb, 2012 08:23 am


N.C. Food ‘Inspector’ Sends Girl‘s Lunch Home After Determining It’s Not Healthy Enough
Fido
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 15 Feb, 2012 08:29 am
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:



It's clear that all US citizens need protection from Obama's big government.

Americans must stand up against this kind of bullshit and vote Obama out of office.
The guys standing up against Mr. Obama now can hardly get a vote let alone a rise out of the people... I am certain it is issues rather than candidate who will bring people to the polls.... Your problem is: People do not like to admit they made a mistake in electing a candidate, so they re-elect him... And; it is hard to beat something with nothing... That was the problem in a nut shell with defeating G W Bush the first time... If you want a president who will fight for you he has to show some fight... Not one of the republicans running so far could fight their way out of a lawn and leaf bag in a thunderstorm...What it will take for any to get the majority of the radical republican vote will lose them the vote of the vast majority of Americans... Mr. Obama will get elected primarily because the republicans are marginalizing themselves... Next open election the Republicans will have an even chance, and if there is an able candidate, he is keeping his powder dry till next time...Now all you got is so many dog is a bull fight, and they will inflict mortal wounds on each other in the process of being nominated...
H2O MAN
 
  -4  
Reply Wed 15 Feb, 2012 08:30 am
@Fido,
All of America must stand up to Obama the Marxist - he is toast.
0 Replies
 
CoastalRat
 
  2  
Reply Wed 15 Feb, 2012 08:45 am
@H2O MAN,
I am as much against Obama as you are H2O, but this is not a Federal issue, it is a state issue. Per the article you linked, "in North Carolina, all pre-Kindergarten programs are required to evaluate the lunches being provided and determine if they meet USDA nutrition guidelines. If not, they must provide an alternative."

So I think you are stretching things in trying to blame this on Obama. There are plenty of things to blame him for without pointing a finger at him for something not under his control.
H2O MAN
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 15 Feb, 2012 08:49 am
@CoastalRat,
CoastalRat wrote:

I am as much against Obama as you are H2O, but this is not a Federal issue, it is a state issue.


It's going to be a big national issue - these are government schools and they are following Michelle Obama's mandates.

Don't diminish the seriousness of what is going on here.
CoastalRat
 
  2  
Reply Wed 15 Feb, 2012 08:58 am
@H2O MAN,
I don't think I am dismissing the seriousness of it. And I most certainly don't agree with the policy. I don't believe any government agency has a right to inspect a kid's lunchbox to determine whether or not he/she is being fed properly. I'm only saying this issue is a NC issue, not a national one. Even if the state is trying to follow guidelines suggested by Michelle Obama, it is ludicrous to blame Obama for a policy that the state implemented without being forced to do so by the federal authorities.

Put the blame where it goes. But in this case, it doesn't belong to Obama.
H2O MAN
 
  -3  
Reply Wed 15 Feb, 2012 09:49 am
@CoastalRat,
I appreciate your opinion, but I think that you are overlooking the bigger picture
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 15 Feb, 2012 01:47 pm


Federal Agents Inspect Your Child's Lunch
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2012 12:18 pm
These kids refused to eat the chicken nuggets at their government school

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GdO0fBsCuSg/TpL93m6n0XI/AAAAAAAAi0U/Mbpd_xE8kZc/s1600/kids_jail.jpg

They will be ground up and served to the students that remain.


.
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2012 02:17 pm
@H2O MAN,
The school people, seeing the kid had no milk, told him to grab a milk out of concern for his diatary needs... He grabbed a whole meal all on his own and made the excuse that he was told to... The right, as usual, has blown some innocent concern for the welfare of a child into some vast conspiracy against human freedom... What total jackasses you all are, and gullible.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2012 02:41 pm
Quote:
One problem: the story is a load of bunk at worst, a non-story at best, standing for little more than the proposition that low-income children in NC’s low-income pre-K program whose parents don’t send them to school with enough healthy food will be provided with additional food to supplement what their parents send them to school with.

For starters, the context in which all of this occurred was a public school pre-K program run by the state popularly known as “More at Four,” but now called the generic name “NC Pre-K.” In order to have a child enrolled in this program, which has a limited number of slots, the parents must actively choose to enroll, with priority going to “at-risk” children, to wit: special needs children and (importantly) low-income children. Indeed, to even be eligible for the program, the child must either fit in one of those two categories or have a parent on (or about to be called on) active military duty. Enrollment as an “at-risk” child means that the child’s enrollment is fully subsidized by the state, regardless of whether the day care is private or public.

These facts are critical because the “state agent” in this story turns out to be nothing more than a researcher from a program that grades the performance of pre-schools and operates out of the FPG Child Development Institute at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. It also does not appear that this institute has any actual authority other than to provide assessments, which the state then uses in making licensing decisions and in setting the fees it will pay the day care provider for subsidized care.

Notably, as the second-linked story above suggests, the mother’s main gripe here does not even appear to be with this “state agent,” but instead with the school’s teachers, who continue to give the girl milk and vegetables despite letters from the mother asking them not to. Indeed, the notion that this “state agent” was going around inspecting every single lunch box brought to the school does not appear to have much basis, as the agent apparently ordered full school lunches for every single child in this program and was evaluating the school’s compliance with standards, not individual parents’ compliance. Even if he was doing such an inspection, there’s a pretty obvious context-specific reason for it: this is an opt-in program for parents who largely can’t afford to provide fully balanced meals.

Her other major gripe appears to be that she is worried about being charged for the additional food being placed in front of her daughter based on a letter from the school purportedly saying that kids who did not bring a healthy lunch would be offered supplements and that parents “may” be charged for the supplemented portions. However, as the second-linked story makes clear, no such charges have been issued nor apparently was there any actual chance that such charges would be issued.

The original story’s claim that the relevant regulation applies to all pre-schools is also false – to the contrary, it applies only to pre-schools choosing to participate in (and eligible for) the subsidized program.

The original story further obscures that in no circumstance was this child – or any child, for that matter – being forced to eat the school-provided lunch, nor was this child -or any other child – deprived of her boxed lunch. Instead, as the second linked story acknowledges, the child was just provided with additional food and given the option to consume that in addition to her boxed lunch. In other words, the claim that the school “replaced” this girl’s turkey sandwich, banana, apple, potato chips, and juice with chicken nuggets is totally bogus.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2012 03:27 pm

The left is in a panic over this issue and they have implemented operation LACKEY.
This operation is designed to deflect, minimize and cover-up the issue.
Fido
 
  2  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2012 03:49 pm
@H2O MAN,
No good deed goes unpunished!
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 16 Feb, 2012 04:07 pm
@Fido,


Obamacare Soylent Green


Fortified with Children.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Are all Republicans Idiots? - Question by BigEgo
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama's food police
Copyright © 2014 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 10/25/2014 at 10:22:53