Michelle Obama Lunch Rules Ban Fried Foods, Frosted Flakes in Daycare

[Carla_Danger]

the left on here are so sick with hate , they can't ever post without attacking a person personally. who want to belong to a place like that?

Apparently you do, otherwise you wouldn't keep coming back every day.

 

[Syriusly]

[
I think it is the job of parents to feed their children. You think children and all people are property of the crown, just like your Aryan brother hod....

So you think no one but parents should be allowed to provide foods to their children?

Why exactly do you think that schools should not be allowed to provide lunches to school children? And what about grandparents- why exactly are you against grandparents feeding their children? And summer camps- do you expect the parents to show up at summer camps each day to personally put food in the mouths of each of their children?

Why do you believe that parents are supposed to be on each boy scout camping trip to personally insert the s'mores into each of their children's mouths?

 

[Dot Com]

I don't why we the people are paying for a bunch of people who are Suppose to Represent US in Congress. these Agencies just make up their own rules to stick on us.

snip:
Michelle Obama Lunch Rules Ban Fried Foods, Frosted Flakes in Daycare
Final regulation only allows daycare centers to serve juice once a day


BY: Elizabeth Harrington
April 25, 2016 1:50 pm


New rules stemming from the school lunch law championed by first lady Michelle Obama are banning popular children’s cereals like Frosted Flakes in daycare centers.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service issued a final rule Monday that will affect more than 3 million kids in daycare centers across the country. The regulation will only allow daycare centers to serve juice once a day, will ban fried foods, and encourages centers to not add honey to a child’s yogurt.

The regulation is a result of the 2010 law aimed at school lunches, a top priority of Mrs. Obama’s Let’s Move anti-obesity initiative. The government hopes ( hummm. the Government hopes) the new rule will “help children build healthy habits.”

“This final rule updates the meal pattern requirements for the Child and Adult Care Food Program to better align them with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, as required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010,” the final rule states. “This rule requires centers and day care homes participating in the Child and Adult Care Food Program to serve more whole grains and a greater variety of vegetables and fruit, and reduces the amount of added sugars and solid fats in meals.”

The law required the USDA to “promote health and wellness in child care settings via guidance and technical assistance that focuses on nutrition, physical activity, and limiting electronic media use,” according to the regulation.

all of the wonderful here:
Michelle Obama Lunch Rules Ban Fried Foods, Frosted Flakes in Daycare

Dingbat, if you don't like it, don't participate in the Government food program. Go buy your own fucking junk food.


This rule requires centers and day care homes
participating in the Child and Adult Care Food Program to serve more whole grains and a greater variety of vegetables and fruit, and reduces the amount of added sugars and solid fats in meals.

bet OP doesn't know how to eat an apple or, more likely, is to lazy to do it

 

[Dot Com]

the left on here are so sick with hate , they can't ever post without attacking a person personally. who want to belong to a place like that?

you know where the door is whiner. Its labeled "log-out"

 

[The VOR]

You would think the crowd that likes to tell people on government assistance what they can/can't do would love this kind of thing.

they are on TAXPAYER assistance (the government doesn't have money trees growing). so it would be nice if they weren't buying booze and cigarettes with it and food which is what it is suppose to be for. good grief not even comparable

Is that what you do with your assistance, buy booze and cigarettes?

And every once in a while she uses it to buy a set of retreads for her trailer.

 

[Camp]

they are on TAXPAYER assistance (the government doesn't have money trees growing). so it would be nice if they weren't buying booze and cigarettes with it and food which is what it is suppose to be for. good grief not even comparable

Head Start is an utter and complete failure.

The Bolshevik agents of the crown lied about the benefits of institutionalizing children at a young age. Pre-School has zero scholastic benefits. Children don't do better in math or reading. Now they DO learn to be inmates, how to be weasels in the system, which is the real purpose of Head Start.

Head Start: A Tragic Waste of Money

I and every other Libertarian has consistently said that if you give your children to the crown to raise, then the King and Queen will see to it that these children are raised to benefit the monarchy and the aristocracy. We should not be surprised that the crown flexes it's authority given the Faustian deal the people have made with our overlords.

Articles from partisan sources are never good sources. For example, the source you are using implies the studies were done between those who attended Head Start and those in the control group showed little difference. What is missing is the mention that the control group attendees were enrolled in community or privately operated preschool programs. The study did not find Head Start was a failure as the conservative sources want to portray, rather, it showed that private and community-run programs were competitive to Head Start.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

Apparently you are such a weak minded mother fucking idiot that you fall for this Conservative whine fest every time.

You object to your tax payer dollars(assuming you even pay any taxes) paying for healthier food for kids- rather than less healthy food.

Comrade shitferbrains, I do indeed object to tax monies taken by force being used to fund federal boondoggles like the failed Head Start program, regardless of what foods are served.

YOU believe that all people are property of the crown, hence our rulers should rightfully determine what their property eats.

 

[Uncensored2008]

only fringers like OP, nonsense2008, and the assorted lolibertarians here. Lets not forget the ODS crowd as well

Dog Cum calling other people "fringe.."

 

[turzovka]

more good news about: THE GOVERNMENT

SNIP:
Study: Cost of U.S. Regulations Larger Than Germany’s Economy
Regs have cost economy $4 trillion, $13,000 per person




BY: Elizabeth Harrington
April 26, 2016 12:50 pm


The cost of U.S. regulations is now larger than Germany’s economy, amounting to a $4 trillion loss to the American economy, according to a new study by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

The study, released Tuesday, found that regulations over the past several decades amount to a loss of $13,000 for each American worker.

“The impact of regulation on economic growth has been widely studied, but most research has focused on a narrow set of regulations, industries, or both,” according to the report. “These studies typically rely on regulatory indexes that measure subsets of all regulation, on country-to-country comparisons, on short time spans, or on surveys in which experts report how regulated they believe their country or industry is.

“In order to better understand the cumulative cost of regulation, a comprehensive look at all regulations across many industries over a long period of time is imperative.”

Researchers at Mercatus studied data from 22 industries from 1977 to 2012, finding regulations have distorted “investments choices that lead to innovation” and have “created a considerable drag on the economy.” The result: an average shrinking of the economy by 0.8 percent a year.

“If regulations had been held constant at levels observed in 1980, the American economy would have been 25 percent larger than it was in 2012,” the report said. “This amounts to a $4 trillion loss in 2012 for the American economy or $13,000 loss per person, a significant amount of money for most American workers.”

The cost of federal regulations amounts to the fourth-largest GDP in the world, surpassing the economies of Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Italy, Russia, and India.

all of it here:
Study: Cost of U.S. Regulations Larger Than Germany’s Economy

This latest mandate from the White House should be a real winner --- akin to Michelle’s previous demands.


1M kids stop school lunch due to Michelle Obama’s standards

As School Meals Have Gotten Healthier, 1.4 Million Students Drop Out of School Lunch Program

Students in Full Revolt Against Michelle Obama's Horrible School Lunch Mandates! - The Political Insider

Kentucky kids to first lady Michelle Obama: Your food ‘tastes like vomit’

Mandate? It's a Mandate?

I do not know exactly what it was, and I really do not care enough to research the history.
Mandate, directive, law, command or suggestion --- whatever it was has affected thousands of public schools and tens of millions of students --- at a minimum --- and almost exclusively in a negative way. Happy?

You know those all don't mean the same thing, right?

I believe the correct word is "suggestion"....there was not mandate. And your trying to be coy about it is quite laughable.

Oh, really? I never bothered finding the exact word and that is enough for your and your pals to jump all over whether it was a mandate, a law, an edict, a plea, a suggestion or whatever. The fact is that a huge number of schools are burdened by this crap food that has kids going away hungry even if they ate it all. Many other kids just toss away their lame vegetables and the institutions know very well that is what is taking place, so Michelle’s objectives are not being met.

But the larger point here is that you took the time to correct me and tell me it was a federal government “suggestion.” Oh, really? Does the fact they withhold federal funding from those schools if they do not comply have any bearing on this “suggestion?” Your ways and many others’ ways around here are so juvenile. Why not seek the truth instead of cheap “victories?”

Families Are Outraged to See Michelle Obama-Approved School Lunches (YUCK!) - The Political Insider
It is clear the school district’s hands are tied, thanks to the mandates and the Federal funding tied to compliance. Michelle Obama should be ashamed that a pregnant 17 year old is stuck eating such a limited meal.

 

[Dot Com]

rw fringers on parade singing the praises of refined sugar.

Please list those health benefits Rightards

 

[Uncensored2008]

Articles from partisan sources are never good sources. For example, the source you are using implies the studies were done between those who attended Head Start and those in the control group showed little difference. What is missing is the mention that the control group attendees were enrolled in community or privately operated preschool programs. The study did not find Head Start was a failure as the conservative sources want to portray, rather, it showed that private and community-run programs were competitive to Head Start.

If you had any evidence that supported Head Start, you would have posted it in an attempt to refute me. Instead you petulantly fling feces in an attempt to obfuscate.

The PROBLEM you have, as you already know is that even far left sources admit the same;

The very left wing Chicago Tribune (Dear Leaders home town paper) notes;

{
For decades, Head Start has consistently disappointed anyone who expected it to make a real difference in the fortunes of the poor.

A 2010 study by the Department of Health and Human Services concluded that though there were modest benefits to participating kids, they soon evaporated. "The benefits of access to Head Start at age 4 are largely absent by first grade for the program population as a whole," it admitted. "For 3-year-olds, there are few sustained benefits."

A federal social program that burns though billions of dollars, year in and year out, despite showing scant value to those it's supposed to help? That may sound like a regrettable anomaly. In fact, as David Muhlhausen documents in his new book, "Do Federal Social Programs Work?," it's pretty much the norm.}

Head Start doesn't work, and neither do most federal social programs.

The ad hom you offered is precisely because you lack any data which can even be twisted to indicate an level of effectivety by the program. Head Start is an utter failure by any scholastic measure and is in fact nothing more than yet another welfare program.

 

[Uncensored2008]

rw fringers on parade singing the praises of refined sugar.

Please list those health benefits Rightards

Where is this praise Dog Cum?

Oh, you're just lying because you're a stupid fuck and can't follow the actual conversation, so you make shit up.

Carry on.

 

[Camp]

[

Apparently you are such a weak minded mother fucking idiot that you fall for this Conservative whine fest every time.

You object to your tax payer dollars(assuming you even pay any taxes) paying for healthier food for kids- rather than less healthy food.

Comrade shitferbrains, I do indeed object to tax monies taken by force being used to fund federal boondoggles like the failed Head Start program, regardless of what foods are served.

YOU believe that all people are property of the crown, hence our rulers should rightfully determine what their property eats.

Providing distorted and inaccurate links from partisan sources do not prove preschool programs like Head Start are failures or boondoggles. Overwhelming objective studies have proven the exact opposite.
You are not forced to pay taxes if you don't want to. Lots of citizens choose to live off the grid on minimum funds and avoid paying taxes. Plus, an elected government has chosen to have a tax structure. If you object, change the government. At present, no one is running for office that wants to do away with all taxes
In regard to foods supplied and given to school kids, the government pays for the food so the government gets to have a say in what it is paying for. If a school district does not like the selection they have the opportunity to remove themselves from the programs and pay for all the food themselves.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

[
I think it is the job of parents to feed their children. You think children and all people are property of the crown, just like your Aryan brother hod....

So you think no one but parents should be allowed to provide foods to their children?

Why exactly do you think that schools should not be allowed to provide lunches to school children? And what about grandparents- why exactly are you against grandparents feeding their children? And summer camps- do you expect the parents to show up at summer camps each day to personally put food in the mouths of each of their children?

Why do you believe that parents are supposed to be on each boy scout camping trip to personally insert the s'mores into each of their children's mouths?

Oh, I would totally support doing away with school cafeterias.

And feeding kids who's parents didn't provide lunches, while at the same time fining parents who don't provide lunches for said kids.

School lunches are a convenience, not a right. So those who complain about them in ANY way should just shut up an pack their kid's lunches. Problem solved.

 

[S.J.]

Fat ass Michelle Obama is NOT a nutrition expert and has no business telling anyone what to feed their kids.

It doesn't take a nutritional expert to know that those fat Southern children do not need to be eating any more fried Twinkies. lol

And it doesn't take a nutritional expert to know that fat ass Michelle has no business telling ANYBODY what to eat.

Why do you think Michelle Obama is a "fat ass"?

Um, because her ass is fat.

 

[Dot Com]

rw fringers on parade singing the praises of refined sugar.

Please list those health benefits Rightards

Where is this praise Dog Cum?

Oh, you're just lying because you're a stupid fuck and can't follow the actual conversation, so you make shit up.

Carry on.

someone piss in your sugar-coated, cheerios today nonsense2008?

 

[S.J.]

Fat ass Michelle Obama is NOT a nutrition expert and has no business telling anyone what to feed their kids.

It doesn't take a nutritional expert to know that those fat Southern children do not need to be eating any more fried Twinkies. lol

And it doesn't take a nutritional expert to know that fat ass Michelle has no business telling ANYBODY what to eat.

She's in tip top shape, and I have no doubt she could kick your rear end. lol

Oh yeah, she's in great shape.

Yes she is. She's certainly not that anorexic form that American fashion sadly admires....causing girls to generate eating disorders.

So, you're fat too, eh? I kinda thought so.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

[

Apparently you are such a weak minded mother fucking idiot that you fall for this Conservative whine fest every time.

You object to your tax payer dollars(assuming you even pay any taxes) paying for healthier food for kids- rather than less healthy food.

Comrade shitferbrains, I do indeed object to tax monies taken by force being used to fund federal boondoggles like the failed Head Start program, regardless of what foods are served.

YOU believe that all people are property of the crown, hence our rulers should rightfully determine what their property eats.

Providing distorted and inaccurate links from partisan sources do not prove preschool programs like Head Start are failures or boondoggles. Overwhelming objective studies have proven the exact opposite.
You are not forced to pay taxes if you don't want to. Lots of citizens choose to live off the grid on minimum funds and avoid paying taxes. Plus, an elected government has chosen to have a tax structure. If you object, change the government. At present, no one is running for office that wants to do away with all taxes
In regard to foods supplied and given to school kids, the government pays for the food so the government gets to have a say in what it is paying for. If a school district does not like the selection they have the opportunity to remove themselves from the programs and pay for all the food themselves.

do you support drug testing welfare recipients? Yes or no?

 

[Camp]

Articles from partisan sources are never good sources. For example, the source you are using implies the studies were done between those who attended Head Start and those in the control group showed little difference. What is missing is the mention that the control group attendees were enrolled in community or privately operated preschool programs. The study did not find Head Start was a failure as the conservative sources want to portray, rather, it showed that private and community-run programs were competitive to Head Start.

If you had any evidence that supported Head Start, you would have posted it in an attempt to refute me. Instead you petulantly fling feces in an attempt to obfuscate.

The PROBLEM you have, as you already know is that even far left sources admit the same;

The very left wing Chicago Tribune (Dear Leaders home town paper) notes;

{
For decades, Head Start has consistently disappointed anyone who expected it to make a real difference in the fortunes of the poor.

A 2010 study by the Department of Health and Human Services concluded that though there were modest benefits to participating kids, they soon evaporated. "The benefits of access to Head Start at age 4 are largely absent by first grade for the program population as a whole," it admitted. "For 3-year-olds, there are few sustained benefits."

A federal social program that burns though billions of dollars, year in and year out, despite showing scant value to those it's supposed to help? That may sound like a regrettable anomaly. In fact, as David Muhlhausen documents in his new book, "Do Federal Social Programs Work?," it's pretty much the norm.}

Head Start doesn't work, and neither do most federal social programs.

The ad hom you offered is precisely because you lack any data which can even be twisted to indicate an level of effectivety by the program. Head Start is an utter failure by any scholastic measure and is in fact nothing more than yet another welfare program.

Again, your source is a partisan commentary. The Tribune piece is based on opinions from The Heritage Foundation.
The basis for my comments is based on the actual 2010 report and follow-ups. Here is a link to the source I reviewed and used to respond to your comments.

researchconnections.org/childcare/resources/28706/pdf

 

[Camp]

[

Apparently you are such a weak minded mother fucking idiot that you fall for this Conservative whine fest every time.

You object to your tax payer dollars(assuming you even pay any taxes) paying for healthier food for kids- rather than less healthy food.

Comrade shitferbrains, I do indeed object to tax monies taken by force being used to fund federal boondoggles like the failed Head Start program, regardless of what foods are served.

YOU believe that all people are property of the crown, hence our rulers should rightfully determine what their property eats.

Providing distorted and inaccurate links from partisan sources do not prove preschool programs like Head Start are failures or boondoggles. Overwhelming objective studies have proven the exact opposite.
You are not forced to pay taxes if you don't want to. Lots of citizens choose to live off the grid on minimum funds and avoid paying taxes. Plus, an elected government has chosen to have a tax structure. If you object, change the government. At present, no one is running for office that wants to do away with all taxes
In regard to foods supplied and given to school kids, the government pays for the food so the government gets to have a say in what it is paying for. If a school district does not like the selection they have the opportunity to remove themselves from the programs and pay for all the food themselves.

do you support drug testing welfare recipients? Yes or no?

No