farking socialism.

/oblig

Yay...!

Oh, great. Now they'll never have any pudding.

You, stand still, laddie!

I wager there's a GOP legislator somewhere out there who is outraged by this.

*REAL* meat plz!

All things in moderation.

SAY IT!

All things in moderation.

Cafeteria meat: now contains more meat product.

More pink slime for children!

More obesity, fantastic.

There's very little meat in these gym mats.

bad food is better than no food.

Shostie: Yay...!

Umm, I'm all for mocking the obese, but I think that kid is balding and likely suffering a disease.

Let him eat cake.

Good. My son told me the breakfast biscuits at school had gotten smaller. Strangely the price remained the same.

fusillade762: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 500x334]

/oblig

More testicles means more iron.

♪ If you don't eat your meat, you can't have any pudding ♪

"Allow"?

You mean up till now schools had been pleading to put in more meat and grains and the USDA had been saying Nope! Give those little brats fat and starch, but don't give them one gram more of meat! They don't deserve it!

Your mom is a big fan of meat.

The difference is what *kind* of meat and grains you allow. Chicken, fish, lean beef/pork, rice, beans, etc are all pretty good for you in normal serving sizes, which of course most people in this country ignore.

I'm guilty too, but at least at home I try to keep it more balanced, and we usually don't go out to eat. My biggest problems are working from home and general lack of motivation to eat better (snacks)/exercise... nutritionally I think we're all right.

Gyrfalcon: "Allow"?

You mean up till now schools had been pleading to put in more meat and grains and the USDA had been saying Nope! Give those little brats fat and starch, but don't give them one gram more of meat! They don't deserve it!

Probably. The american legislation about what foods school kids were allowed to have was farking ridiculous when I watched Jamie Oliver try to change school lunches in california. He got stuck in endless battles with the powers that be over issues just like that.

This is really sad. Ignorance is a shiatty drug, but outright anger against people who are useful and effective at caring for the health of children is even shiattier planning.for a nation.

Why is the federal government even involved, except maybe to promote some segments of farming and food packaging industries over others? Most of us have seen "nutritional standards" that are espoused by various governing and accrediting bodies. It's a farking joke. You could go to school for twelve years, get a free breakfast and lunch every single day, and never eat a single fresh food item.

"Whole grains" is a label that means nothing. Your farking Lucky Charms say they are made from whole grains.

"Meats" are often salty over-processed meat leftovers like hot dogs, chicken nuggets/patties, and low-quality burgers. You know, dog food.

Parents need to take an active role in the foods their children eat and not wait around for the government to invent some magical infallible formula for healthy eating. End soapbox.

We should have government bacon.

BoxOfBees: Why is the federal government even involved,

Because they pay for much of it?

cptjeff: BoxOfBees: Why is the federal government even involved,

Because they pay for much of it?

Can we now call it "Obama Meat"?

cowgirl toffee: cptjeff: BoxOfBees: Why is the federal government even involved,

Because they pay for much of it?

Can we now call it "Obama Meat"?
.
You do realize his fat ass wife is the one who took away food from the children?

cowgirl toffee: cptjeff: BoxOfBees: Why is the federal government even involved,

Because they pay for much of it?

Can we now call it "Obama Meat"?

Obviously the meat being pushed by Obama is noticeably larger than the one offered by any previous administration.

Thank goodness no Asian presidents...the kids would starve!

david_gaithersburg: cowgirl toffee: cptjeff: BoxOfBees: Why is the federal government even involved,

Because they pay for much of it?

Can we now call it "Obama Meat"?
.
You do realize his fat ass wife is the one who took away food from the children?

I guess that when you reach a certain age, a woman will take her meat wherever she can get it.... even if it's from children.

Prof. Frink: cowgirl toffee: cptjeff: BoxOfBees: Why is the federal government even involved,

Because they pay for much of it?

Can we now call it "Obama Meat"?

Obviously the meat being pushed by Obama is noticeably larger than the one offered by any previous administration.

Thank goodness no Asian presidents...the kids would starve!

Or they would be eating dog.

Snapper Carr: I wager there's a GOP legislator somewhere out there who is outraged by this.

You kididng? I'm sure they're behind this. Apparently getting kids to eat healthier is a Liberal plot.

A win for the white bread and mystery meat lobbies.

If they want to do something about obesity in kids, they should reduce or even eliminate the grains. They get converted to sugar in the body, which causes an insulin spike, which eventually causes the body to retain more fat. Plenty of meat, plenty of veggies (especially raw, like salads), some fruit, a few nuts: that's what's good for us.

Think about it: why is the recommended diet, a.k.a. The Food Pyramid, set by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and not the health department? Because the USDA is pushing to sell more farmers' grains. That's what the agency does- help market agribusinesses' products. That's why there's high-fructose corn syrup in everything sweet, rather than sugar: to sell more corn. It's not because a diet high in grains is actually healthy, it's because such a diet sells more grain.

DarkSoulNoHope: Prof. Frink: cowgirl toffee: cptjeff: BoxOfBees: Why is the federal government even involved,

Because they pay for much of it?

Can we now call it "Obama Meat"?

Obviously the meat being pushed by Obama is noticeably larger than the one offered by any previous administration.

Thank goodness no Asian presidents...the kids would starve!

Or they would be eating dog.

I think you may have missed the innuendo. I hope.

Metalithic: DarkSoulNoHope: Prof. Frink: cowgirl toffee: cptjeff: BoxOfBees: Why is the federal government even involved,

Because they pay for much of it?

Can we now call it "Obama Meat"?

Obviously the meat being pushed by Obama is noticeably larger than the one offered by any previous administration.

Thank goodness no Asian presidents...the kids would starve!

Or they would be eating dog.

I think you may have missed the innuendo. I hope.

I didn't, but believe me, there is no smaller meat out there than Hummer drivers!

Metalithic: DarkSoulNoHope: Prof. Frink: cowgirl toffee: cptjeff: BoxOfBees: Why is the federal government even involved,

Because they pay for much of it?

Can we now call it "Obama Meat"?

Obviously the meat being pushed by Obama is noticeably larger than the one offered by any previous administration.

Thank goodness no Asian presidents...the kids would starve!

Or they would be eating dog.

I think you may have missed the innuendo. I hope.

It's a small dog. (?)

vinniethepoo: Plenty of meat, plenty of veggies (especially raw, like salads), some fruit, a few nuts: that's what's good for us.

You might be able to get schools to put it in the lunches, but good luck trying to get the kids to actually eat it.

I wonder how my generation survived without government intervention.

Old enough to know better: You kididng? I'm sure they're behind this. Apparently getting kids to eat healthier is a Liberal plot.

A win for the white bread and mystery meat lobbies.

You're probably right (actually after I RTFA, yeah, you're right), however I was going more for the "spending money caring for children is a waste of resources" school of thought that many of them seem to subscribe to.

BoxOfBees: Why is the federal government even involved, except maybe to promote some segments of farming and food packaging industries over others? Most of us have seen "nutritional standards" that are espoused by various governing and accrediting bodies. It's a farking joke. You could go to school for twelve years, get a free breakfast and lunch every single day, and never eat a single fresh food item.

"Whole grains" is a label that means nothing. Your farking Lucky Charms say they are made from whole grains.

"Meats" are often salty over-processed meat leftovers like hot dogs, chicken nuggets/patties, and low-quality burgers. You know, dog food.

Parents need to take an active role in the foods their children eat and not wait around for the government to invent some magical infallible formula for healthy eating. End soapbox.

See, this is why labels mean nothing and yet mean everything. Lucky Charms are indeed made from whole grains. That is, the flour they are made from does in fact start out as whole grains. The fact that it is no longer "whole" by the time it ends up in the box as Lucky Charms is irrelevant. The label is true. They are made from whole grains. It doesn't say they are STILL whole grains.

Same with "meats." They are meat. Hot dogs are 100% beef. It doesn't say they have to say which part of the cow they came from, since hooves, tendons, intestines are from the cow, they are included in the monicker "beef." Nowhere is it required on a hot dog to say "100% top sirloin" (unless it's marketed as being 100% sirloin, as some kinds of meats are). A hot dog made from organically raised beef entrails could quite honestly claim it was 100% organic and still be made of pure floor scraps, so long as there was no pesticide or antibiotic residue in it; and people would think it was really good shiat.

The real question here is, what is the goal of school lunches? Is it to get kids to learn healthy eating habits, or is it to force them to eat fruits and vegetables? Realistically speaking, we'd be doing better to have them eating healthier pizzas and better chicken nuggets than trying to force them to eat salads and steamed broccoli; but neither one of those is likely to happen. Health nuts are going to insist on Fresh veggies! Fresh fruit! Lower sodium! and their opponents are going to say Keep government out of my kid's lunch! and the end result is kids will throw away the mushy apples and skim milk like we always did and eat out of vending machines; or more probably just skip lunch completely and binge on crap at 7-11 after school, which is a great way to learn how to eat.

Spaced Lion: vinniethepoo: Plenty of meat, plenty of veggies (especially raw, like salads), some fruit, a few nuts: that's what's good for us.

You might be able to get schools to put it in the lunches, but good luck trying to get the kids to actually eat it.

I've always liked veggies, even when I was a kid. Maybe I'm different that way (I've always liked fried liver, too), but when I was in school I don't remember any kids who hated absolutely all vegetables: maybe one who didn't like tomatoes and another who hated mushrooms, and like that. I think most everyone can get behind a nice chef's salad with their favorite dressing, though. Or a chicken Caesar, or taco salad.

From what I remember of school lunches we were given small servings of corn, carrot sticks, cole slaw, cooked green beans or peas, or carrot slaw with raisins (that was popular. The rest, not so much, but we'd eat them 'cause we were hungry and they didn't serve seconds.) Not many kids left any food on their trays, that I remember seeing. Of course, many of us had parents who grew up during the Depression, so we were taught that it was practically a sin to waste food.

Every year, when I was in school, there was always "the fat kid", that is, ONE kid in each grade that was fat and everyone ridiculed. Now, it seems like nearly all the little Farkers are fat!

You know how this issue can be fixed or avoided?
Sack lunch. Yes, get off your lazy ass and pack your kid a lunch or teach them to do it themselves.

AbbeySomeone: You know how this issue can be fixed or avoided?
Sack lunch. Yes, get off your lazy ass and pack your kid a lunch or teach them to do it themselves.

We're taking about kids eating subsidized lunches. Their parents can't afford to pack lunches for their kids, a bunch of them don't even know what to pack, and the rest are too cracked out to care. Blame the parents, but don't punish the kids.

owlie: AbbeySomeone: You know how this issue can be fixed or avoided?
Sack lunch. Yes, get off your lazy ass and pack your kid a lunch or teach them to do it themselves.

We're taking about kids eating subsidized lunches. Their parents can't afford to pack lunches for their kids, a bunch of them don't even know what to pack, and the rest are too cracked out to care. Blame the parents, but don't punish the kids.

How is it punishing the kids by suggesting the parents make them a lunch or teach them to do it themselves?

AbbeySomeone: owlie: AbbeySomeone: You know how this issue can be fixed or avoided?
Sack lunch. Yes, get off your lazy ass and pack your kid a lunch or teach them to do it themselves.

We're taking about kids eating subsidized lunches. Their parents can't afford to pack lunches for their kids, a bunch of them don't even know what to pack, and the rest are too cracked out to care. Blame the parents, but don't punish the kids.

How is it punishing the kids by suggesting the parents make them a lunch or teach them to do it themselves?

"Hey kid, go pack your lunch. Haha just kidding. I sold our food stamps for crack. Here's a candy wrapper."

But seriously, I am on a bus right now going through one of Philadelphia's many shiatty ass neighborhoods and you can bet a lot of kids are waking up to no food in the house and none to look forward to until lunchtime Monday. Of course it's worse at the end of the month before that welfare check comes in. It really stinks. Leave the subsidized lunches alone and let the kids eat while they can.

People need to understand that the whole debate about what children are "allowed" to eat is the result of the "free" school lunch program. When voters demand that the government provide a good or service to the people, they never want to come to terms with the fact that, sooner or later, the government will then arrogate to itself the power to tell you what you will get. This is true of welfare, housing assistance, food assistance, health care and, yes, even the free contraceptives. If you want the government to give you stuff, accept the fact that the government will decide what it is you will get.

Big Food wins again!

Snapper Carr: Old enough to know better: You kididng? I'm sure they're behind this. Apparently getting kids to eat healthier is a Liberal plot.

A win for the white bread and mystery meat lobbies.

You're probably right (actually after I RTFA, yeah, you're right), however I was going more for the "spending money caring for children is a waste of resources" school of thought that many of them seem to subscribe to.
.
So what your are admitting to is that you are a mindless drone incapable independent thought. Sad. You remind me of when Howard Stern went on the streets of Harlem and interviewed people during the 2008 election.

The automated health assessment at work we use to get lower rates dings your nutrition if you don't eat *enough* grains. I have to lie every year if I want that question to go well.

Wow the Federal government working with local school systems to make new school lunch guidelines more practical. The tyranny!!!!!! This must have been what it was like to live in the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. I am outraged or something!