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

http://news.yahoo.com/kentucky-students-first-lady-michelle-obama-food-tastes-131827085.html

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

So why are we letting the federal government determine what is going on a lunch plate in rural America?

I posted an article a couple of weeks ago about the new and improved school menu.

The crux of the matter regarding Michelle's project...the schools are spending more money for food, less children are eating the school lunches, and food waste has increased significantly. So....children that really need a good meal at school are not getting it because 14% of kids are fat.

Better get those rappers on board for dance classes ....does Miley rap?

Exactly but you know Moochelle knows more than anyone else.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Exactly but you know Moochelle knows more than anyone else.

Pacedog......you are just being cynical. Michelle has to have something to do between vacations.

This is insane! They should just ask the kids what they want to eat and then give it to them. What kind of irresponsible person would dare give kids food that is nutritious, particularly when they are in a learning environment? I say give them all the junk and sugar that they want. On one hand, it tastes great to kids. On the other hand, countless studies have shown that a diet high in processed sugar goes along way in preparing the juvenile brain for learning and really enhances a kid's ability to focus on stuff that they would otherwise find boring. Plus there are all the dental benefits. I could go on but I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir here.

Did you actually read about ANY of the problems with the lunch program or are you just jumping on the political bandwagon?

http://eagnews.org/federal-report-identifies-numerous-problems-that-were-created-by-michelle-obamas-healthy-school-lunch-overhaul/

http://eagnews.org/tag/national-school-lunch-program/

boards of FL wrote:This is insane!  They should just ask the kids what they want to eat and then give it to them.  What kind of irresponsible person would dare give kids food that is nutritious, particularly when they are in a learning environment?  I say give them all the junk and sugar that they want.  On one hand, it tastes great to kids.  On the other hand, countless studies have shown that a diet high in processed sugar goes along way in preparing the juvenile brain for learning and really enhances a kid's ability to focus on stuff that they would otherwise find boring.  Plus there are all the dental benefits.  I could go on but I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir here.

Well, what's the point if kids won't eat it or parents won't buy it from the cafeteria? Having eaten the newer hamburger and chicken sandwich buns from a local school, I know exactly what the kids are complaining about in regards to this. Big government should not extend its hands this far without them expecting to get slapped and pushback happening. Also, most cafeterias are run by companies now and the workers are members of that company (Sodexho in Santa Rosa County). These companies are in business to make a profit and were probably doing fine until now.

The school nutrition program was a failure...it costs the school system billions. It increased the cost of student meals, provided food the kids do not like and will not eat, and had extremely high percentage of daily waste. Kids are not going to eat food they don' t like. Sad part...indigent kids need the lunch program but don't eat what is now provided.


Growing active children need calories...healthy calories!

According to the  most recent available data from the CDC, 18% of adolescents (children ages 12-19) are overweight. The percentages for children ages 6 to 11 and ages 2 to 5 are 15% and 11% respectively. If you take the average of the three percentages, you come up with a figure of 14.7% for of the entire childhood population of the U.S.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Well, what's the point if kids won't eat it or parents won't buy it from the cafeteria?

I know! We did all we could here. Let's end Michelle's efforts and then just introduce McDonald's and Burger King into the public school cafeteria. The moral of the story here is that adults are completely powerless and kids call all the shots with respect to their diets.

Will someone get me more gasoline for this fire?

boards of FL wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Well, what's the point if kids won't eat it or parents won't buy it from the cafeteria?

I know!  We did all we could here.  Let's end Michelle's efforts and then just introduce McDonald's and Burger King into the public school cafeteria.  The moral of the story here is that adults are completely powerless and kids call all the shots with respect to their diets.  

Will someone get me more gasoline for this fire?

LOL....Flying by the seat of your pants?  Michelle wants to ration the portions and cut calories. Students don't get FAT on school lunches. The source of the problem is junk food at home and a lack of physical activity. Like I said, healthy active kids need good calories not restricted calories.


Furthermore, you seem to think the " lunch room ladies" decide the school menu and run out and buy the food.  School nutrition is and has been regulated for years by USDA.

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:When I was in grammar school (late 1950s-early 1960s), the food was very basic, but it wasn't bad. It cost $0.25 per day. They served things like chillibeans, hot dogs on a whole-wheat bun, hamburger gravy on rice pilaf (I would die for some of that today...). The food was prepared onsite by the cafeteria workers. No pizza was ever served. After lunch you could get an ice cream cone for an additional $0.10.

I don't remember there being free or reduced-price lunch for kids from poorer families. My parents were basic middle-class folks. I got $1.35 per week; enough for 5 lunch tickets and one ice cream cone ticket.

Where did all of this fall of the tracks?

  I loved the chili we had at school.....our lunches were $1.25 for a 5 day meal ticket. Our choice of drink was whole milk or on rare occasions chocolate milk. In the mornings after mass,  if we took communion,  we could get a sweet roll and juice. You had to fast 3 hours before communion.

Joanimaroni wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Well, what's the point if kids won't eat it or parents won't buy it from the cafeteria?

I know!  We did all we could here.  Let's end Michelle's efforts and then just introduce McDonald's and Burger King into the public school cafeteria.  The moral of the story here is that adults are completely powerless and kids call all the shots with respect to their diets.  

Will someone get me more gasoline for this fire?

LOL....Flying by the seat of your pants?  Michelle wants to ration the portions and cut calories. Students don't get FAT on school lunches. The source of the problem is junk food at home and a lack of physical activity. Like I said, healthy active kids need good calories not restricted calories.


Furthermore, you seem to think the " lunch room ladies" decide the school menu and run out and buy the food.  School nutrition is and has been regulated for years by USDA.

No response from Boards?

While I'm Spamming... I think school lunches should have Spam as key ingredient if the purpose is to make our students vomit.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anwy2MPT5RE

 

I lived for hot school lunches.   They were all prepared by school employees.  There was no outsourcing.   Cafeteria employees were long term employees, and they baked and prepared items from scratch.  They were great.  Sure there would be on day out of a 14 day cycle which was nasty, but these were fresh fruits, vegetables, meat, and fresh breads with milk, not pop or colas.

Like Z said we would get some snacks after the meal and returning our trays.   Some people would bag lunch.   There was no subsidy given to students from low income families which was obvious to the students.   My situation at home after my father died was quite disruptive, and the meals at school meant a great deal to me at that time.   The workers who had worked there for years were very good at what they did and they took pride in their product.  About the early 80s School administrators saw they could save money as they outsourced the cafeteria workers.   They made dollar decisions and not nutrition decisions.   I do not necessarily agree that the problem needs to be addressed at the federal level, but the outsourcing certainly has led to a significant quality drop at schools.   We were so much thinner than kids today, but I simply do not remember anybody drinking pop.   It was all milk or water.   Sometimes orange juice, but these were incredibly balanced meals and I was lucky not to have been fed the crap they feed kids today.

I kinda' like Spam myself.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anwy2MPT5RE

 

2seaoat wrote:I lived for hot school lunches.   They were all prepared by school employees.  There was no outsourcing.   Cafeteria employees were long term employees, and they baked and prepared items from scratch.  They were great.  Sure there would be on day out of a 14 day cycle which was nasty, but these were fresh fruits, vegetables, meat, and fresh breads with milk, not pop or colas.

Like Z said we would get some snacks after the meal and returning our trays.   Some people would bag lunch.   There was no subsidy given to students from low income families which was obvious to the students.   My situation at home after my father died was quite disruptive, and the meals at school meant a great deal to me at that time.   The workers who had worked there for years were very good at what they did and they took pride in their product.  About the early 80s School administrators saw they could save money as they outsourced the cafeteria workers.   They made dollar decisions and not nutrition decisions.   I do not necessarily agree that the problem needs to be addressed at the federal level, but the outsourcing certainly has led to a significant quality drop at schools.   We were so much thinner than kids today, but I simply do not remember anybody drinking pop.   It was all milk or water.   Sometimes orange juice, but these were incredibly balanced meals and I was lucky not to have been fed the crap they feed kids today.

You are absolutely correct on everything. We were thinner because we were active. TV was on in the evenings for an hour after the news.... but we never missed an episode of Sunday night Bonanza.The rest of the time we were outside playing.

I was always excited to visit with one of my friends.....they had kool-aid. Mom never bought kool-aid for us and I couldn't figure out why....after all it was only a nickel a pack. Cokes were a rarity.

Like many others who have posted on this subject, I, too, have fond memories of the food . . . . the smell . . . the satisfaction of a great lunch. At our school it was .25 . . . . I was allotted .35 which allowed me to spend the other dime at my discretion. I usually saved those in a secret place at home. The food, however, was good or at least very acceptable . . . .. I cannot attest to how fresh or nutritious it was but I suspect it was both.

Those criticizing or making mean-spirited remarks directed at "Moochelle" should be ashamed of themselves but that is the cost of free speech. The concept of providing fresh and nutritious lunches for kids is more than a laudable endeavor . . . . it is an uphill climb to change the attitudes of these kids but it's either grow up to to be a "disgusting fat body' (re: Full Metal Jacket) or change these kids views of taking responsibility for their eating habits. I say Moochelle is on the right track . . . .

knothead wrote:Like many others who have posted on this subject, I, too, have fond memories of the food . . . . the smell . . . the satisfaction of a great lunch.  At our school it was .25 . . . . I was allotted .35 which allowed me to spend the other dime at my discretion.  I usually saved those in a secret place at home.  The food, however, was good or at least very acceptable . . . .. I cannot attest to how fresh or nutritious it was but I suspect it was both.

Those criticizing or making mean-spirited remarks directed at "Moochelle" should be ashamed of themselves but that is the cost of free speech.  The concept of providing fresh and nutritious lunches for kids is more than a laudable endeavor . . . . it is an uphill climb to change the attitudes of these kids but it's either grow up to to be a "disgusting fat body' (re: Full Metal Jacket) or change these kids views of taking responsibility for their eating habits.  I say Moochelle is on the right track . . . .  

  

I don't think it's the right track and I'm not ashamed of saying so. If you read about the problems associated with trying to  maintain good nutrition and cutting calories, you might understand. 

Since the implementation of the program... Less children are eating the school lunches, more food is wasted, and the schools are loosing money.  If it keeps going......there will not be any school prepared lunches. 

 Overweight children are receiving about 25% of their meals at school......the other 75% at home. Healthy active kids do not need reduced portions and reduced calories just because 14% of kids are overweight.

knothead wrote:Like many others who have posted on this subject, I, too, have fond memories of the food . . . . the smell . . . the satisfaction of a great lunch.  At our school it was .25 . . . . I was allotted .35 which allowed me to spend the other dime at my discretion.  I usually saved those in a secret place at home.  The food, however, was good or at least very acceptable . . . .. I cannot attest to how fresh or nutritious it was but I suspect it was both.

Those criticizing or making mean-spirited remarks directed at "Moochelle" should be ashamed of themselves but that is the cost of free speech.  The concept of providing fresh and nutritious lunches for kids is more than a laudable endeavor . . . . it is an uphill climb to change the attitudes of these kids but it's either grow up to to be a "disgusting fat body' (re: Full Metal Jacket) or change these kids views of taking responsibility for their eating habits.  I say Moochelle is on the right track . . . .  

Moochelle needs to take her own advice then....her rear end is as big as a school bus.

knothead wrote:it is an uphill climb to change the attitudes of these kids but it's either grow up to to be a "disgusting fat body' (re: Full Metal Jacket) or change these kids views of taking responsibility for their eating habits.  I say Moochelle is on the right track . . . .  

Forcing kids to eat the tripe they serve in the cafeteria now isnt going to change a thing.

boards of FL wrote: Let's end Michelle's efforts and then just introduce McDonald's and Burger King into the public school cafeteria.  The moral of the story here is that adults are completely powerless and kids call all the shots with respect to their diets.  

Yes end her efforts. She's a ditz that doesn't even eat what she tells others to eat. In the hood they would call that "talking out the side of her neck".

As for this statement:
The moral of the story here is that adults are completely powerless and kids call all the shots with respect to their diets.

You have ZERO children obviously. When mom and dad are not there, what do you think they will eat?

Joanimaroni wrote:

knothead wrote:Like many others who have posted on this subject, I, too, have fond memories of the food . . . . the smell . . . the satisfaction of a great lunch.  At our school it was .25 . . . . I was allotted .35 which allowed me to spend the other dime at my discretion.  I usually saved those in a secret place at home.  The food, however, was good or at least very acceptable . . . .. I cannot attest to how fresh or nutritious it was but I suspect it was both.

Those criticizing or making mean-spirited remarks directed at "Moochelle" should be ashamed of themselves but that is the cost of free speech.  The concept of providing fresh and nutritious lunches for kids is more than a laudable endeavor . . . . it is an uphill climb to change the attitudes of these kids but it's either grow up to to be a "disgusting fat body' (re: Full Metal Jacket) or change these kids views of taking responsibility for their eating habits.  I say Moochelle is on the right track . . . .  

  

I don't think it's the right track and I'm not ashamed of saying so. If you read about the problems associated with trying to  maintain good nutrition and cutting calories, you might understand. 

Since the implementation of the program... Less children are eating the school lunches, more food is wasted, and the schools are loosing money.  If it keeps going......there will not be any school prepared lunches. 

 Overweight children are receiving about 25% of their meals at school......the other 75% at home. Healthy active kids do not need reduced portions and reduced calories just because 14% of kids are overweight.

*****************************************************

Joani,

I will respond to your post but not to the ignorance of PD.  You are smart and informed . . . . . would you agree that this is going to require a learning curve and incentivise smart decisions? It's irrelevant that kids turn their nose up at healthy food initially but like all things it requires an informed and respected source (educators) to drive in their knuckleheads the benefits of healthy eating habits and the dire consequences of poor eating habits.

knothead wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

knothead wrote:Like many others who have posted on this subject, I, too, have fond memories of the food . . . . the smell . . . the satisfaction of a great lunch.  At our school it was .25 . . . . I was allotted .35 which allowed me to spend the other dime at my discretion.  I usually saved those in a secret place at home.  The food, however, was good or at least very acceptable . . . .. I cannot attest to how fresh or nutritious it was but I suspect it was both.

Those criticizing or making mean-spirited remarks directed at "Moochelle" should be ashamed of themselves but that is the cost of free speech.  The concept of providing fresh and nutritious lunches for kids is more than a laudable endeavor . . . . it is an uphill climb to change the attitudes of these kids but it's either grow up to to be a "disgusting fat body' (re: Full Metal Jacket) or change these kids views of taking responsibility for their eating habits.  I say Moochelle is on the right track . . . .  

  

I don't think it's the right track and I'm not ashamed of saying so. If you read about the problems associated with trying to  maintain good nutrition and cutting calories, you might understand. 

Since the implementation of the program... Less children are eating the school lunches, more food is wasted, and the schools are loosing money.  If it keeps going......there will not be any school prepared lunches. 

 Overweight children are receiving about 25% of their meals at school......the other 75% at home. Healthy active kids do not need reduced portions and reduced calories just because 14% of kids are overweight.

*****************************************************

Joani,

I will respond to your post but not to the ignorance of PD.  You are smart and informed . . . . . would you agree that this is going to require a learning curve and incentivise smart decisions? It's irrelevant that kids turn their nose up at healthy food initially but like all things it requires an informed and respected source (educators) to drive in their knuckleheads the benefits of healthy eating habits and the dire consequences of poor eating habits.

Because you can't respond to FACTS.

Because you can't respond to FACTS.


Your view and spins are enough to make most vomit because of your disrespectful comments towards "Moochelle". Go look in the mirror . . .