In Wisconsin, high school athletes are complaining about not getting enough to eat each day, due to the skimpy new school lunch menu mandated by the United States Department of Agriculture and First Lady Michelle Obama.
The story we published earlier this week on that subject is unfortunately not unique. Students across the country are complaining about the new school lunch regulations.
Perhaps the real motive is to starve students into slimming down. Just ask students in Pierre, South Dakota who, too, are in an all-out revolt.
“I know a lot of my friends who are just drinking a jug of milk for their lunch. And they are not getting a proper meal,” middle school student Samantha Gortmaker told Keloland.com.
Despite the fact that the new regulations have increased the cost of a lunch 20 to 25 cents per plate, it’s not pleasing students.
Some are throwing away their vegetables while others are adapting to the rules by becoming industrious. In New Bedford, Massachusetts, students have created a black market – for chocolate syrup. The kiddie capitalists are smuggling in bottles of it and selling it by the squeeze, according to SouthCoastToday.com.
Nancy Carvalho, director of food services for New Bedford Public Schools, was quoted as saying that hummus and black bean salads have been tough sells in elementary cafeterias. That means even smaller children are going through the day fighting hunger pains, which can never be considered a good thing.
One government official tried to put the blame on the students.
“One thing I think we need to keep in mind as kids say they’re still hungry is that many children aren’t used to eating fruits and vegetables at home, much less at school. So it’s a change in what they are eating. If they are still hungry, it’s that they are not eating all the food that’s being offered,” USDA Deputy Undersecretary Janey Thornton was quoted as saying.
Read more here: http://townhall.com/columnists/kyleolson/2012/09/23/complaints_mount_against_michelle_obamas_new_lunch_menu
Hello, students? Where does it say you HAVE to eat cafeteria food? How about you bring your own lunch?
Good point, I think I ate cafeteria food not more than 10 times growing up K thru high school. I had a steel lunch box with some kind of dinosaur on it, inside I had a sandwich, maybe a cupcake or banana and either I bought milk at the cafeteria or I had a thermos. I remember that was always breaking. Something about a fragile glass liner and little kids didn’t work out. Sandwiches were butter and jelly, tuna fish or peanut butter and jelly, sometimes bologna and cheese. Worked for me, I was happy.
Oh please. This is the biggest bunch of whining I’ve heard in a long time. Pack a lunch if you don’t want to eat healthy. My kids hate the healthy food they serve in Chico schools (and have been serving for years, even before Obama). Michelle Obama does not pass legislation and I agree with her. The school cafeteria food was garbage. I’m sorry Wisconsin high school kids don’t like vegetables and miss their tater tots but we don’t need to keep the potato and soft drink lobbies in business.
If the Wisconsin kids are poor and don’t like the free lunch then too bad. It is free. If they are paying, they don’t have to pay, pack a lunch from home.
“Nancy Carvalho, director of food services for New Bedford Public Schools, was quoted as saying that hummus and black bean salads have been tough sells in elementary cafeterias. That means even smaller children are going through the day fighting hunger pains, which can never be considered a good thing.”
Nancy’s not supposed to be “selling” anything. She stands up tall, like a grown-up, and says: “if you’re hungry, you’ll eat it.
And if she gets complaining parents, she tells them to make the kid’s lunch themselves. And if they crab about that, she tells them to do the planet a big, fat, favor and get their tubes tied.
You’re forgetting all of the kids that get “free” lunches and don’t or won’t bring their own.
I read the story this morning too and though bring a lunch or a large snack or two. Especially if they’re going to play a sport they do need more.
I want to see the study on how much of this slop is wasted because kids trow it in the garbage or nobody wants it.
This is just another control freak power grab at the federal level…as if parents and school administrators don’t have the ability to make the right decisions at the local level. School lunch is not what is making kids fat.
Did ya hear about the budding entrepreneurs that brought chocolate syrup to school and were selling it by the squirt?
I have to agree with the posts, but to me it is not Michelle’s place to dictate what kids must eat.
One kid said they are forced to eat what is given, humus? really, ugh.
Oh by the way the First Daughters had pizza today.
I never liked cafeteria food either, only bought it once in awhile on hamburger day. I do remembr kids throwing their food away and or having food fights.
I graduated high school in 1958, just to give a time frame.
Nothing really changes, except we paid.
My kids eat hummus and black beans. Are they arguing that a microwaved hamburger and tater tots is better for our kids? One bite of black bean or hummus is better than what they used to serve.
Sorry that a generation of liberal morons have raised their kids to eat garbage, then expect the schools to provide more of the same. Our schools are supposed to educate our kids about healthy living and that starts with good food and exercise. Just because kids don’t eat carrots doesn’t mean we feed them french fries.
When I was a kid we ate what my parents fed us and that was it. My parents didn’t feed us candy cereal for breakfast. We ate “mush” and my mom packed healthy lunches. Kids had to sit at the lunch table if they got hot lunch until they finished their lunch. No throwing the whole tray away was allowed back then. We had to be dismissed from our table.
From what I’ve seen of people in Wisconsin they could use a little more black bean and hummus and a lot less sausage and cheese.
Harriet: “I have to agree with the posts, but to me it is not Michelle’s place to dictate what kids must eat.”
Michelle Obama does not dictate what kids must eat.
The title of this post makes no sense. The Marie Antoinette comparison is more readily applied to Mitt Romney, who expressed his total disdain for the poor last week.
It’s really amazing that so many conservatives now feel the need to take a stand against healthy eating. If the Obamas came out in support of breathing oxygen, I think conservative bloggers might just make themselves blue.
Thing is Chris she is dictating what they eat, the food served is not a suggestion, the kids are told to take it, however they are throwing it away.
Romney did not show his disdain for the poor, the video did not show his talk in its entirety. I wonder who the creep was that took the video, they snuck into a private residence. The video was made in June or July, inteesting it just came out.
Your comment about oxygen is important to me, I am on it 24/7
“total disdain for the poor”
What a drama queen!
Romney has done more for the poor and the needy in one year than you will ever do in a lifetime.
This resentment of people with money is really UGLY. I guess it goes along with that socialist sense of entitlement…the state owes me and the state should take it from the rich guy and give it to me…YUK!
Has anyone else noticed this? When did Americans get to be so class conscious, so covetous, so neeeeeeeedy…and so danged UGLY in their attitudes?
Chris: “Michelle Obama does not dictate what kids must eat.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/12/13/president-first-lady-child-nutrition-bill-basic-nutrition-they-need-learn-and-grow-a
The law does dictate:
http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/governance/legislation/cnr_2010.htm
Would you look at the number of programs we have in place to feed people! Talk about redundancy and extra expense!
This regulation (LAW) was amended about six times…the final product is here:
http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/governance/final/2011-06-29.pdf
It’s basically another spread the wealth program. We’re feeding the poor breakfast, lunch, and dinner (whole families at school not just kids) even in the summer in some cases.
I don’t mind feeding hungry people that don’t have the means to themselves. I HATE making being fed so easy that recipients never bother to improve their own lives.
Since we are in a non-recovery recovery, and the economy continues to bump along on the bottom, and since even those who are highly educated and trained can’t find a job this is yet another means for keeping the masses from rioting in the streets. (Another key to an election bought at the expense of us all)
It would be interesting to know how much these regulations cost to implement when most of it is just common sense and school boards will get tired of spending for food that keeps some students hungry and gets thrown away.
All First Ladies adopt a project while their husbands serve the nation. This was Michelle’s project. I like her purpose and goals…but a 100 pound little cutie pie in the library with her nose in a book is very different from a big strapping athlete…those boys (and girls) need their carbs! This ‘one size fits all” project is over the top. Exercise used to be mandatory in school; incorporating a twenty minute workout would be more useful that taking all the (bad) carbs and fats out of the menu.
Besides, I doubt if what they were eating at school before is what makes them fat and flabby…that is accomplished at home and on weekends.
Chris the reason you think conservatives are “taking a stand against healthy eating” is because you miss the point entirely, being stuck in that liberal box. To understand you must bravely seek a different world view…a new experience…it happens to most of us after kids, at around aged 30.
Freedom. Teaching our posterity to think for themselves and engage in smart living. Benjamin Franklin had many words of wisdom to share on this subject. Here he does the entire alphabet; more than a few apply:
http://sln.fi.edu/franklin/printer/abc.html
A. An empty bag cannot stand upright.
B. Be always ashamed to catch thyself idle.
C. Cheese and salty meat should be sparingly eat.
D. The Doors of wisdom are never shut.
E. Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise.
F. Full of courtesy, full of craft.
G. God helps them that help themselves.
H. Hunger never saw bad bread.…
Z. There are lazy minds as well as lazy bodies.
Oh, Harriet, get online! Who knows how true it may be, but it’s thrilling reading. The tapers posted just a snatch on YouTube. Jimmy’s grandson, trolling for such stuff, spotted it and had the hardest time getting the tapers to part with the whole thing.
Bombshell, so it was.
And it’s true, somehow they managed to infiltrate a very private, high-end fundraiser. And now we know how high-end, Repug donors comport themselves, and ain’t that an eye-opener.
Romney will lose this election because 1) he hasn’t got the balls to tell these people that they are full of ****, and 2) because he hasn’t got the integrity to say just what it is that he proposes to do … knowing full well, that if he did, there would be nothing at all to choose between him and Obama.
Suckers.
Harriet: “Romney did not show his disdain for the poor”
Bull. He said that the 47% of the country who are too poor to pay income taxes see themselves as “entitled” “victims” whom he will “never convince” to “take responsibility and care for their lives.”
If that’s not disdain for the poor, then nothing is.
And then, of course, when I criticize Romney for insulting the poor, Tina calls me a drama queen and thinks I just hate rich people.
Rich people, you see, are the REAL victims of class warfare, and poor people are the aggressors.
It’s insane.
The disdain I feel is for the legislators and supporters that continue to push the policies that have created an entitlement mentality among large swaths of people in America. A very good case can be made for the damage they have done using Senator Moynihan’s report of 1965!
I defy you, Chris, to state with certainty that the woman in the video I just posted does not have an “entitlement mentality” or that she could ever be convinced to vote for Mitt Romney.
Romney spoke a truth…a sad horrible truth about the result of methods democrats used for decades to make sure poor folks, particularly blacks, vote democrat.
Harriet the creep that took the video violated the laws of the state they were in which requires the consent of the person being taped.
I think the women in that video is crazy….totally nuts. It’s kind funny but her nasty gravelly voice, her rapid fire talking, the way she wouldn’t shut her mouth for two seconds to listen, she acts like she’s retarded. Then again, I’ve seen a lot of black women act just like that in the hood, could they all be crazy, is it too much crack or is it a ghetto thing? Whatever it is I was not impressed by her conduct…she sounded like an a-X#$% and mental that should NEVER be allowed within a 1000 feet of a voting booth or around small children.
Tina: “I defy you, Chris, to state with certainty that the woman in the video I just posted does not have an “entitlement mentality” or that she could ever be convinced to vote for Mitt Romney.”
Why? Do you honestly think that woman represents 47% of America?
She comes across as an idiot. I don’t know if I would call her “entitled.” The program she is talking about taking advantage of has been supported by presidents ranging from Roosevelt to Reagan to Clinton to Bush. Contrary to what you both believe, Obama has nothing to do with it. I don’t think she could ever be convinced to vote for Romney, but that’s at least half Romney’s fault.
Bull. He said that the 47% of the country who are too poor to pay income taxes see themselves as “entitled” “victims” whom he will “never convince” to “take responsibility and care for their lives.”
Chris, you mean like the woman who said she gets a free phone, and can get her friends to get them too, with of course free minutes.
I am on Social Security with my husband, neither of us felt he was speaking about us, Romney was speaking of those who have their hands out for more.
I have talked to folks with very limited funds, they qualify for food at the pantries then gripe about the food.
The more “free stuff” people get the more they will want. Our government no longer seems to encourage independent behavior.
“Chris, you mean like the woman who said she gets a free phone, and can get her friends to get them too, with of course free minutes.”
Again: the program she is talking about was supported by both Reagan and Bush, and Obama has not expanded it at all. If you are going to accuse this program of encouraging dependency, at least acknowledge the fact that Republicans built that.
Also, do you really think this ignorant woman represents 47% of the country?
“I am on Social Security with my husband, neither of us felt he was speaking about us, Romney was speaking of those who have their hands out for more.”
He specifically said he was talking about the 47% who don’t pay income tax. If you don’t pay income tax, then his words applied to you.
He may not have actually been thinking about seniors on Social Security when he made these remarks, but if that’s the case, that means he doesn’t think through his statements before he makes them. Given how prone he is to contradicting himself–often switching positions over the course of one day–this should not be news to you.
Chris I’m not sure I called the free cell phone an Obama phone. The woman receiving it did. She believes he gave it to her, and is encouraging everyone to get a free phone and vote for Obama.
A fellow called Tom Sullivan the other day from Oakland he said he knows people that truly believe that Obama will give them money for their house rent. No matter what you say to them they have the firm belief that is true. These are part of what I would call the 47%.
But Harriet, you really think those kind of people make up almost half the country?
of course not, but there are still 47% who don’t pay taxes, that is the fact.
If voters get wound up over that comment they will vote for Obama, and we will be “lost”
But Harriet, isn’t the more exasperating aspect of that statistic the fact that so many people don’t make enough money to pay federal income tax. Do you really think that a couple trying to raise kids on $30k should have to part with $10k to the feds? I think they should get food stamps and national health insurance and free college; that’s what I think.
(Actually, what I really think is they shouldn’t have the kids … but nobody listens to me.)
Chris: “Again: the program she is talking about was supported by both Reagan and Bush”
The program Reagan and Bush supported was a program for every home to have a phone for emergencies. In Reagan’s era handheld phones were brand new…mobile phones still in R&D.
Obama phones are being given to anyone who gets food stamps, for any reason whatsoever! If you are in the category you can get a free phone! That isn’t the intent of Bush or Reagan.
The SEIU was involved in this protest. it is entirely within the range of probability that they told this woman she was entitled to a free phone and she should vote for Obama because he was a president who cared about her enough to gove her a free phone…and Romney sucks. I haven’t heard Obama say he was against it…or warn the department that they should do a better job of administering the program…or admonish the SEIU and other groups from telling people that they entitled can have free phones.
“But Harriet, you really think those kind of people make up almost half the country?”
I defer to the American Thinker:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/02/the_welfare_state_of_the_union.html
Chris I think you are the exception, not the rule when it comes to entitlement mentality. That is why I credited you and your mom for doing whatever you can to pull yourselves into the middle class.
I would love to see you thrive in a much better economy.
The chances of that happening are slim under any president given the state of our economy but more importantly the state of the world economy. The chances are impossible under Obama and will get much worse if he is re-elected.
The stock market has been artificially propped up by the fed printing money and the cliff is looming.
It is time to change course.
Libby: “…what I really think is they shouldn’t have the kids … but nobody listens to me.”
I agree. I just don’t believe in the dictator forcing it as policy. Smarter people due to better education and tough love expectation might improve the condition over time. We shouldn’t have kids when we aren’t prepared to support them, especially in a day and age when prevention is readily available and possible even for Catholics with a high sense of personal responsibility!
There has always been low income that don’t pay taxes, but again, they are not on the “dole” with their hands out. You do know that Romney’s comments was edited, he said “Too bad all of my comments were not aired”.
I agree with you that the kids should come later.
“The program Reagan and Bush supported was a program for every home to have a phone for emergencies. In Reagan’s era handheld phones were brand new…mobile phones still in R&D.”
This is a pointless quibble. In urban areas, the payphone is a thing of the past, and if you are going to be any sort of economic participant, you gotta have a cell … and why do you the let the Drudgester expose your bigotry like this?
Yes, the woman is pathetic. The country’s full of pathetic people. Most of them are of anglo-saxon descent, and all of them can get a subsidized cell … in the vain hope that they will stop being pathetic. We are not holding out breath, but a civilized society offers what in can in the way of a leg up.
You do know that Romney’s comments was edited, he said “Too bad all of my comments were not aired”.
And then they were. Mother Jones quite gleefully put the entire tape online. You should go look.