Published: Thursday, May 29 2014 12:00 a.m. MDT
“Who could argue? Except that at no time did she mention costs, which is,
of course, the point of the proposal”.(proposed legislation to allow
states to opt out of the nutrition requirements). And there you
have it - the bottom line of every argument. How much will it cost?“Her “Let’s move!” campaign is commendable, but it
doesn't command anywhere near the resources of the nutrition
program.”Well, duh! If I have an exercise program for my
family that includes a daily walk and more vigorous training three times a week,
how will the cost of that program compare to the family’s weekly grocery
bill?Yes, the First Lady should be commended for her
“Let’s Move!” program and she should also be allowed to use
her position as a mother who is married to the president to call attention to
anytime Congress tries to shortchange the health of nation's children.
Your approach makes a lot of sense.However it will be ignored by Ms.
Obama and this Administration because it will not generate needed political
talking points to support the upcoming elections.
" School nutrition? Why not emphasize physical fitness instead?"Why not both?The school lunch program was established in
1948 because it was found to be necessary for the National Defense.It was a direct response to the millions of children who had experienced
malnutrition during the Great Depression that left them unfit for military
service when they tried to enlist during World War II.Good nutrition
makes good sense. And so does exercise. When I was a kid, the
Presidents Council on physical fitness, was a big deal. Guidelines had been
established for minimum fitness requirements, and yes we had at three recesses a
day when we could run around as much as we wanted. I couldn't have imagined
a day without recess.I feel sorry for kids today, who do not have
that opportunity.The "President's Council on Physical
Fitness" still exists, but you hardly ever hear about it.
"Conservatives" would probably get upset if is was promoted. They would
probably accuse Obama of trying to systematically brainwash their children.That's the difference between now an then. Extremists like the John
Birchers, were dismissed as irrelevant. Now they are mainstream in the Red
I also remember a time when kids were allowed to go out to the playground
essentially 3 times during the school day. Morning and afternoon recess and noon
recess after you ate. We played basketball, softball, dodgeball, swung on
swings, climbed on jungle gyms, jumped rope, etc. Yes we still had some
kids who were overweight but they were getting some exercise also. 90+ kids on a
150' x 250' lot and very few injuries required more than a Band-Aid.
The first lady advocated better nutrition and growing our own vegetables. For
that she has been highly criticized. I don't remember Laura Bush being
criticized for encouraging reading over emphasizing math. Criticize
the Obamas where they deserve, but let's be honest that this attack is
purely political and frequently racist. How? It's the disproportionate
vitriol aimed at a stay-at-home mother. The only difference between her and
previous first ladies is that she is black.
Plain and simple junk food might be cheaper but should it be a staple in a
school lunch. If our kids have a diet problem, and many do, why reinforce that.
Midwest Mom,Racisms? Really?There is no evidence that
the criticisms directed towards the Obamas is racist. Rather, the criticisms
are based upon differing philosophies and politics. But the racist
charge is very predictable. It is thrown out there anytime traction is needed
by the Democratic party. Criticism for the cost of school lunch
programs is racist? Hardly.Now, to be honest, I commend Mrs. Obama
for highlighting the obesity problem in America and I support her efforts.
Nutrition and exercise are both needed and should be emphasized.There, I'm a white, male, Republican and I support Mrs. Obama in this.
Both not just one.
There isn't big money in focusing on allowing kids to play sports. That is
all it boils down to. Big money, big donors.If you don't have
deep pockets to sue, then it's not an issue. For example the NAACP focuses
on racist issues in the US when there is a deep pocket (ie police, politicians,
businesses etc). I have yet to hear them lament about racism in foreign lands,
the slaughter of pigmies in Africa etc. There is no money to be had over
there.If the schools had private gyms and students were getting fat,
then the gym would be sued for having fat kids around it. Rather than going
after the parents the school and leaders that take away gym time.
"If a school loses money on lunches for six months in a row, something is
wrong."Why? Maybe I missed something here, but I didn't realize
that my childs elementary school needed to make a profit. I always thought it
was about teaching kids......
Where have you been? Mrs. Obama has been emphasizing nutrition AND exercise -
BOTH! By the way, experts tell us that nutrition plays a far bigger role in
weight loss than does exercise. By this, no one is saying don't exercise,
not at all. Both nutrition and exercise are critically important to good health
and proper weight. But please, don't distort what Mrs. Obama is trying to
accomplish. In fact, why don't you push our local school districts to give
more emphasis to PE. Not more on competitive sports, on various physical
activities, both in school and to develop skills and interest in life long
activities. Football doesn't count.
Yes. Let's blame kids not exercising on Mrs. Obama. Do you know the
number one class our high school kids are taking on line? Fitness for Life -
the only required physical education class required to graduate. Perhaps the State should change that loophole?
@Midwest MomI did a search on this page and you are the first person
to post the words "racist" and "black". Why do you feel the
need to defend against an attack that never happened?
why not just get government out of peoples lives and leave them alone!!!
@ Patriot. Because liberals think the rest of us are stupid and just can't
make it without them forcing us to do what's best for us, according to
I think schools asked for it with pop and candy machines and Cheetos as part of
the sold lunch before action was taken. Schools should not have
gyms. They should have fitness centers like adults go to. Fitness
for Life isn't physical activity class. There are not many online classes
and students would rather leave their schedule open for other things like math
and science and language. PE is too popular. You can't get 2000 into the
gym daily for activity. I think schools should move away from gyms and have
fitness centers instead. In house track. Cycle class rooms.
If a school loses money on lunches for six months in a row, something is wrong.
And there is evidence a few districts are doing just that. There is indeed no
such thing as a free school lunch.You can’t exercise your way
out of a potato chip bag and a can of high fructose corn syrup soda. It’s
too bad that it costs money to store fresh produce but I wonder what is more
expensive: a lifetime of diabetes drugs and medical care or a refrigerator to
store fresh produce. I finished the 10-day challenge to eliminate
sugar and artificial sweeteners from my diet. Essentially the challenge is to
try for 10 days to eat foods that do not contain any processed sugars or
artificial sweeteners (sugar found in natural fruits, vegetables and milk are
ok). I’m now past day 20 and was shocked to discover today that carrots
taste good. If we can eliminate the junk food from school lunches and replace
with fresh produce, maybe school children would discover vegetables taste good
Oh yes, here we go again. As a current student in middle school, I find the
"healthy" (but still processed and very greasy) school lunches are, in
fact, DISGUSTING, so I've found a loophole. Enter; home
lunches. Lunches that you bring to school in a paper bag that contain whatever
goodies you want them to.Now what? After the changing-school
-lunches-to-make -them-"healthy", comes the physical education (which
might work), and then schools will find that--wait for it--home lunches contain
cookies with high calorie amounts. And then you might be saying bye bye to your
yummy cookie. I just wish that we wouldn't be forced to eat
what they tell us to and we could just go back to the simple days.
No matter the good intentions, no dictatorship is worth it.Let us us be free to live our lives and pursue our happiness.
You are so right "the Truth"... I was so deeply offended by Laura Bush
and her reading push.... I'll teach my kids to read if I want to... she
can't tell me reading skills are good for my kids. But you know, like
Mountainman says, the Laura Bush thought we were stupid and needed to be told
to read.Unbelievable. We go from healthy eating for kids at school
is socialism, to I guess we have to choose between good nutrition "or"
fitness. You can't do both evidently. It's too bad because Mrs.
Obama has been promoting fitness as well... I guess that would be a double
whammy.... socialism and communism all wrapped into a dictatorship promoting
fitness and nutrition.I wonder if the same crowd feels Ann
Romney's work as first lady of MA was out of line when she promoted teenage
pregnancy prevention efforts. Were these same Michele Obama detractors raising
up their voices against Ann... telling her to "why not just get government
out of peoples lives and leave them alone!!!"Surely they
don't have different standards... ok for one side.....but not for the
other? Would they?
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments