Government's Long, Chocolate-Covered Fingers
America's self-appointed nanny-state nutritionist-in-chief, Michelle Obama (and never mind that she has zero science background), is championing a bill to limit bake sales and other fundraisers in schools, writes Mary Clare Jalonick for the AP:
"This could be a real train wreck for school districts," Lucy Gettman of the National School Boards Association said Friday, a day after the House cleared the bill. "The federal government should not be in the business of regulating this kind of activity at the local level."The legislation, part of first lady Michelle Obama's campaign to stem childhood obesity, provides more meals at school for needy kids, including dinner, and directs the Agriculture Department to write guidelines to make those meals healthier. The legislation would apply to all foods sold in schools during regular class hours, including in the cafeteria line, vending machines and at fundraisers.
Day to day, I don't really eat carbs, because I see that the science (per Gary Taubes, Dr. Michael Eades, and other solid sources) shows that it's carbohydrates that cause people to be fat, and they also seem to cause a host of other health problems. Still, every week/week and a half or so, I'll have a chocolate gelato or a dessert of some kind, because...well, because it's no way to live, going entirely without chocolate or dessert.
I was raised by a mother who thought she was doing the right thing by feeding us (this awful) "health food." (Gregg refers to my childhood as "the gruel years.") My mother meant well, but she was a terrible cook, and a worse judge of human nature. Years of denial creates children that would sell their bodies on the street corner for a bag of m&ms. I didn't do that, and I never got really fat, but I did have a wee thing for chocolate, Twinkies, and all the stuff I was denied until I corrected it, sometime in my 20s.
Oh, and psssst!, Michelle! You stem childhood obesity by serving more cheeseburgers, fewer buns. Science, baby.
via Overlawyered







Michelle Obama? Right. She's not qualified. She lacks any depth in health or fitness experience. And she certainly doesn't look like she benefits from a low-fat diet.
Obama, the pear-shaped, piano-legged empress has no credibility when she harumphs "Let them eat apples..."
Passepartout at December 9, 2010 3:25 AM
Oh, and psssst!, Michelle! You stem childhood obesity by serving more cheeseburgers, fewer buns. Science, baby.
Or, another solution - stop having unelected busybodies trying to create legislation that interferes in people's personal lives and force the parents to take some effing responsibility. Oh wait, I forgot, the government is our parents. My bad.
Jake Taylor at December 9, 2010 4:33 AM
Or, another solution - stop having unelected busybodies
Should have added the fact the the the First Lady's First Spawn attend a privatd school
lujlp at December 9, 2010 4:56 AM
I'll eat like Obamita tells me to when she looks like I want to. Just like I'll worry about driving my car to the store when Gore stops flying his personal jet everywhere.
momof4 at December 9, 2010 6:30 AM
Riiiiiighhht, because it's bake sales that ruin kids' diets. Like the school is serving fresh veggies, whole milk, and delectable slices of beef to the kids who didn't bring a packed-at-home-with-love lunches; but the dastardly band kids are ruining those good intentions. Hawking cake and pie irresponsibly so they can afford a new tuba.
Elle at December 9, 2010 6:35 AM
Don't worry, the "Motor Law" is next, referred to in "Red Barchetta" in Moving Pictures by Rush:
The song describes a future in which many classes of vehicles have been prohibited by "the Motor Law." The narrator's uncle has kept one of these illegal vehicles (the titular red Barchetta sportscar) in pristine condition for some "fifty-odd years" and keeps it hidden at his secret country home (previously a farm before the enactment of the aforementioned Motor Law). During one of his weekly drives, the narrator encounters an "alloy air car" (police?) that begins to chase him along the roads. A second such vehicle soon joins the pursuit, which continues until the narrator drives his Barchetta across a one-lane bridge that is too narrow for the air cars.
Red Barchetta lyrics
Songwriters: Lee, Geddy; Lifeson, Alex; Peart, Neil;
My uncle has a country place that no one knows about
He says it used to be a farm before the Motor Law
And on Sundays, I elude the eyes, hop the turbine freight
To far outside the wire, where my white-haired uncle waits
biff at December 9, 2010 7:00 AM
Waiting patiently for someone to take offense at the juxtaposition of t the phrases "Chocolate-covered fingers" and "Michelle Obama"
Vinnie Bartilucci at December 9, 2010 7:45 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/12/governments-lon.html#comment-1796096">comment from Vinnie BartilucciA girl can dream!
Amy Alkon
at December 9, 2010 7:50 AM
I'm looking forward to hearing what Michelle Obama will have to say in a few years about the abysmal failure of her program, because, of course, it WILL fail.
mrfreddy at December 9, 2010 7:52 AM
Disregarding the faulty logic at play in general, I find the idea that the federal government could institute such a policy absolutely terrifying. Outlawing bake sales goes way beyond the reach of anything the feds need to worry about. It's bad enough when states take such drastic action ("let's ban salt!" comes to mind), but the fact is, this has nothing to do with the purview of federal government! This is a *HUGE* overreach of power, and it terrifies me to think of what "Good for You Laws" a First Lady twenty years from now might be able to enact on a whim.
By the way, what legislative power does a First Lady really have? I mean, she's not in any kind of political position, right? She's just the Pres's wife, right? Isn't her day job lawyering?
I also found another little tidbit worrisome, and I hadn't heard this bit reported in the news before Amy's post: "The legislation ... provides more meals at school for needy kids, including dinner..."
Okay, so now at lower income schools, the parents won't even be responsible for providing ONE MEAL for their kids during a school week? Most of the Title Ones around here already provide free breakfast! And during the summer, they still run a breakfast/lunch program! I understand that times can be tough, but aren't these people able to apply for food stamps if getting ONE MEAL a day for their children is too much money for them to spend!?! When did our school system become a social welfare system? Why are the schools, who should be concentrating on educating students, being forced to branch out into feeding children, providing counseling services, babysitting for before/after school, and other non-educational things?
I feel really bad for the teachers, who get stuck providing these types of things, and who are the ones who get blamed for when it fails. If there's one thing I've learned from watching my friend's years of teaching, it's that individual teachers are pretty much powerless. They have edicts from the principals/administration, who have edicts from the School Board, who are usually trying to do one of three things: 1) Cover their asses, 2)Get money, or 3) Follow state recommendations/guidelines.
I apologize for the length of this post; this is something that simply got me Furious.
cornerdemon at December 9, 2010 8:55 AM
"The legislation...provides more meals at school for needy kids, including dinner..."
I grew up in a communist country. Even there, the state expected parents to feed their own children. The only free meal they gave out at my elementary school was a weekly dose of medicine. At the appointed time, all the little girls & boys would line up in neat rows outside their classrooms, and the school nurse would give each of us a tablespoon of cod liver oil. Any kid who didn't choke it down & say "thank you" got a slap in the face.
"The gruel years" - a perfect title for your autobiography! I can see the cover already - a little red-haired Jewish girl staring sadly down at a bowl of cold porridge...
Martin at December 9, 2010 9:44 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/12/governments-lon.html#comment-1796140">comment from MartinHah - Martin, that is a great title.
Amy Alkon
at December 9, 2010 10:33 AM
huh, so, call me crazy sandy, but doesn't this move us an enticing step closer to govt. as parent? where neither the father nor mother has to be involved and a child from cradle to grave get to be provided for by the very govt. they always vote for...
I wonder what Pink Floyd has to say about this?
"If you don't eat yer meat, you can't have any pudding! How can you have anny pudding if you don't eat yer meat?"
SwissArmyD at December 9, 2010 11:58 AM
Can the federal government please just F off out of our personal day to day lives, decisions and interactions, thank you.
Lobster at December 9, 2010 2:27 PM
Bzzt. Lobster, you are fined $5 dollars for breaking the verbal morality statute.
All government Food Parlors are Taco Bell.
Sio at December 9, 2010 8:56 PM
> Can the federal government please just F
> off out of our personal day to day lives,
> decisions and interactions, thank you.
Well, y'know, the government regulation of farms and industries and markets is a huge part of what's made obesity such a problem. I kinda admire Michelle for wanting to do something about it.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at December 9, 2010 11:02 PM
If Michelle Obama is so worried about health why doesn't she concentrate on discouraging her husband's chain smoking instead of trying to regulate what I feed my kids.
So in her house smoking is tolerated but my kid can't get a bag of chips at school.
Brett at December 10, 2010 8:09 PM
Leave a comment