Public School Lunch Inspection

[Don]

http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/homemade-lunch-replaced-with-cafeteria-nuggets.html

Several very worrisome items in this:
1) The principal said he didn't know anything about parents being charged for meals that day. All he knows is that they eat in the cafeteria.

2) A state inspector who thinks chicken nuggets are better than turkey and cheese?

3) Probably the worst:

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.

I understand the concern for our children, and eating properly; but you've just taught a bunch of 4 year olds that any "agent" can ask to see what's in your box, and they should just show them. The 4th Amendment is out the window.

 

[windcatcher]

Wow!
Talking about government under color of law and "its for YOUR good" being a bully!

This packed lunch was a well rounded meal... perhaps a little heavy on carbs BUT a 4 year old may not eat all of any serving and is also active... if given opportunity for vigorous play... consuming calories for activity, growth, and learning.

I hope this doesn't stop with just this one mother's complaint: More need to get on the band wagon and protest!

It's not government's responsibility to stop people from making bad choices or to save them from consequences as long as their choices doesn't hurt the rights of others to life, liberty, and property.

It is the purpose of law to prevent us from hurting others and to protect property rights.... Beyond that, the government has little to no right to engage in the private business of the people's lives.

Many reasons to pack a lunch for a child: family economics. food preferences and picky eaters. allergies of children which cafeteria food may contain. Who's responsibility for the welfare of children? It's the parents first and foremost.

At the age of 4 years old, this impressionable child has already been confronted and dominated by figures of authority, whom she has been taught to trust, essentially discrediting her mother's judgment. What harm can be inflicted upon the young minds of a single incident such as this? What about repeated incidents in various situations throughout the days of their young lives....... at public school?

Outraged!

 

[mont974x4]

And people ask me why we're homeschooling.

 

[annsni]

And people ask me why we're homeschooling.

While it's not the reason we're homeschooling, you'd be darn tootin I'd be up their rears if my kid was in school. I'd not allow them to tell me what I could serve my own child.

To me, there are better reasons to homeschool your child than lunch. But then again, watching my 11 year old son make omlettes for the other kids was kind of cool.

 

[mont974x4]

You and I both know the lunch is merely a symptom. :thumbs:

 

[Oldtimer]

I saw a news report on that a few minutes ago.

Not enough time as passed for me to express my outrage in polite terms.

 

[HankD]

This is just another small manifestation of our growing "Big Brother" government.
This "lunch inspection" probably as a result of the influence of the "First Mommy".

Someone has said that president Obama has to be nice during his first term.

If this term is his example of "nice" what will the second term be like when he doesn't have to care anymore even of the base who will sweep him in for his number 2 session in November?

HankD

 

[InTheLight]

This is just another small manifestation of our growing "Big Brother" government.
This "lunch inspection" probably as a result of the influence of the "First Mommy".

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to blame Obama.

Someone has said that president Obama has to be nice during his first term. If this term is his example of "nice" what will the second term be like when he doesn't have to care anymore even of the base who will sweep him in for his number 2 session in November?
HankD

Rush Limbaugh, ladies and gentlemen! Rush Limbaugh is in the house!

Classic Rush-ism. Make up a statement quoting nobody, but making it sound like it's a quote. Then use a leading question, (and one that begs the question), then make an unsupported assumption followed by two more assumptions. Make it sound like a fact. Great stuff.

And Hank, I'm not attacking you, just this particular method of argument. I do enjoy your posts (maybe not this one, though.)

 

[glfredrick]

Just wait... It is going to get worse.

I see children toss out hundreds of dollars worth of food that they will not touch but if I scavenge I am in violation of federal law. Our government would rather pay Waste Management to bury usable food than to allow someone other than whom it is intended have use of it -- even if the one for whom it is intended tosses it in the garbage. :BangHead:

Just imagine having to haul out 100 pounds of brand new milk, cereal, fruit, etc., because some kiddo took it and tossed it in the garbage. Makes me CRAZY!

 

[Benjamin]

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to blame Obama.

First, Hank didn't blame Obama, he blamed his Old Lady.

Rush Limbaugh, ladies and gentlemen! Rush Limbaugh is in the house!

Classic Rush-ism. Make up a statement...

Second, you really want to talk about rhetoric after that?!


:laugh:

 

[HankD]

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to blame Obama.

Rush Limbaugh, ladies and gentlemen! Rush Limbaugh is in the house!

Classic Rush-ism. Make up a statement quoting nobody, but making it sound like it's a quote. Then use a leading question, (and one that begs the question), then make an unsupported assumption followed by two more assumptions. Make it sound like a fact. Great stuff.

And Hank, I'm not attacking you, just this particular method of argument. I do enjoy your posts (maybe not this one, though.)

OK, the first point someone else dealt with.

The second RE: "rushism" - (BTW, I rarely listen to him), I'm at the age now where I often times can't remember who said what concerning something I've heard or perchance it was an original thought.



HankD

 

[InTheLight]

OK, the first point someone else dealt with.

Last time I checked the First Lady's name was Michelle OBAMA. :smilewinkgrin:

The second RE: "rushism" - (BTW, I rarely listen to him), I'm at the age now where I often times can't remember who said what concerning something I've heard or perchance it was an original thought.



HankD

I quit listening to him years ago because I don't like his arguing style. Although unintentional, your post happened to hit on several of his tactics.

 

[HankD]

Last time I checked the First Lady's name was Michelle OBAMA. :smilewinkgrin:

I quit listening to him years ago because I don't like his arguing style. Although unintentional, your post happened to hit on several of his tactics.

To quote my wife

Whatever!

HankD