Because the Job of the Federal Government

And they have the liberty to do that if they so choose, but the government does not have the authority to tell them that they cannot. Where in our body of laws does it say that the government has authority to tell people or their children what they can or cannot eat?

I don't think it appropriate for the government to tell them what they can and cannot stuff their kids' faces with on their own time. But I don't think schools should be enablers and they shouldn't be in the business of purveying snacks and sweets to our kids.
 
Sorry that I got you mixed up with a CA liberal—but my mistake is understandable because there's not a whole lot of difference between a CA liberal and a NY liberal. :D

What do you think of the reports circulating that your mayor is considering a run for the presidency as an independent? Since he would have little appeal to Red State voters, the Democrat Party had better try to get a game plan worked out to deal with him. I did note that Obama met privately with Bloomberg recently, so maybe a deal was worked out that Bloomberg will become Obama’s vice-presidential candidate. That would defuse an otherwise problematic situation and would be one sure way to wrestle the nomination from Hillary.



It’s been more than 30 years since Nixon was president. Personally, I have very little interest in how Nixon would be perceived today.

As to "loonies" hijacking the GOP, no more so than the ultra left hijacking the Democrat Party.

Except that the party platform of the dems isn't "ultra left". Most of the presidential candidates are fairly to the middle, with a few exceptions, no one's a nutter... as opposed to the repub platform, which IS radical right.

Hence, how Nixon would be perceived IS relevant since it gives a clue to just how far-gone your party is.
 
And they have the liberty to do that if they so choose, but the government does not have the authority to tell them that they cannot. Where in our body of laws does it say that the government has authority to tell people or their children what they can or cannot eat?

It doesn't, and oh hey its not, so why are you worrying where in the body of laws it is if the government isn't doing it?
 
I don't think it appropriate for the government to tell them what they can and cannot stuff their kids' faces with on their own time. But I don't think schools should be enablers and they shouldn't be in the business of purveying snacks and sweets to our kids.

Why? We had snacks, cokes, candy bars when I was in junior high and no one complained. Aren't grocery stores purveyors too. Maybe we should shut them down also.
 
Yeah, it was elementary through junior high, 79-82, in Kentucky. Now if my memory serves me correctly, we were only able to drink juices ie cranberry, orange, apple right after gym. We had one break during the day that we could get a candy bar or coke. We still had to eat the school house slop though, no a la carte. LOL. that didn't come until high school.
 
Yeah, it was elementary through junior high, 79-82, in Kentucky. Now if my memory serves me correctly, we were only able to drink juices ie cranberry, orange, apple right after gym. We had one break during the day that we could get a candy bar or coke. We still had to eat the school house slop though, no a la carte. LOL. that didn't come until high school.

Exactly. No one was selling sugar filled soda and snacks all through the day. I usually went home for lunch because I lived a block away from my elementary, junior high and high schools. But if we ate in school, it was juice or milk... and either a sandwich or the gloppy hot lunch. No cola, hershey bars, etc. I don't think kids should be able to buy snacks all day. I know I could have two cookies and milk when I got home from elementary school, though. I remember really enjoying that. ;)
 
I might be wrong but I think that if a school receives federal aid, then the federal government has a right to be involved. If a school receives absolutely no federal support then, in my opinion, the federal government has no right to intrude. I’m not basing this comment on any particular law. I am just commenting based on my notion of fairness. If the feds give money, then the feds have a vested interest.
 
Yep, I couldn't imagine being a kid today, all couped up in the house with all the gadgets, playstations and whatnot. Being inside the house was the last place we wanted to be.

Not at my house... Its WWF here... BB guns, dirt bikes, quads, tree forts, boxing to settle disputes,trapping muskrats,possum,racoons and anything else we can skin... And guess what... My yard is full of kids that can appreciate the fine taste of a bloody nose or lip who all agree helmets are for fags... The rest of the kids are either afraid to come or not allowed over...one or the other I'm told..
 
What is it about our liberal friends who insist that others be made, forced and banned? Why do y'all enjoy legislation that pervades into our lives and why give them so much power to control our lives. If someone wants to eat something, that god forbid, has fat in it.....so what. I just don't understand govt interference into our lives. We've got a complete circus in DC and I wouldn't trust them running a generator.


Liberals believe we need to be protected from ourselves, because like everything else, due to their superior intelligence they know whats better for everyone.
 
What seems to have been missed is that this is NOT banning anything. It is merely making some things unavailable in public schools. While, obviously, the government should not be banning sugar/sweets/whatever there is no reason that the government has a responsibility to provide it for sale in schools. The government should not ban the sale of cigs/alcohol/porn/knives, but nor would I like them selling any of those things in public school even to kids who were above the legal age to buy them.

Wrong as usual ... Why am I not surprised ...It is not resticted to the SALE in schools... WE cant pack what they consider unhealthy and if you do you sure as shit better not share!
 
Liberals believe we need to be protected from ourselves, because like everything else, due to their superior intelligence they know whats better for everyone.

and do you think the number of govt employees has increased or decreased under Bush? It has increased, which leads me to believe that Conservatives are the ones who want more control.
 
Wrong as usual ... Why am I not surprised ...It is not resticted to the SALE in schools... WE cant pack what they consider unhealthy and if you do you sure as shit better not share!

From the article..

Federal lawmakers are considering the broadest effort ever to limit what children eat: a national ban on selling candy, sugary soda and salty, fatty food in school snack bars, vending machines and à la carte cafeteria lines.

Nowhere does it say that you can't bring your own in.
 
I might be wrong but I think that if a school receives federal aid, then the federal government has a right to be involved. If a school receives absolutely no federal support then, in my opinion, the federal government has no right to intrude. I’m not basing this comment on any particular law. I am just commenting based on my notion of fairness. If the feds give money, then the feds have a vested interest.

Except the Federal Government has NO Constitutional right to tax or pay for schools in Individual States. NONE what so ever. They have usurped a power of the State Governments and Local School Boards Unconstitutionally.
 
Except the Federal Government has NO Constitutional right to tax or pay for schools in Individual States. NONE what so ever. They have usurped a power of the State Governments and Local School Boards Unconstitutionally.

Actually I believe for the most part up to the states to decide whether or not to accept Federal funding. In our district, they chose NOT to accept any Federal money, so the state must leave it up to the district.
 
Try keeping up...the rest of us are talking about a federal law being contemplated by the US Congress.

And again for the slow. Education is NOT a power delegated to or authorized to the US Government. It is a State power, normally reserved to local districts.

It is completely Unconstitutional for the Federal Government to have any business in Education at the State or lower level, it is an illegal usurpation of State Authority and power.
 
Hence, how Nixon would be perceived IS relevant since it gives a clue to just how far-gone your party is.

What are you saying, Jillian? That Richard Nixon was a Republican worthy of respect and emulation, one who should be a role model for today’s GOP? Mercy me! What will you libs come up with next?

You love to accuse the GOP of being taken over by the “loonies” but absolutely refuse to admit that the Democrat Party has been taken over by the ultra left. Who are the traditionalist leaders in the Democrat Party today? Certainly not the likes of Reid, Pelosi, Durbin, Leahy & company. That is probably why many of the moderate Democrats elected to Congress in 2006 are voting with the Republicans. The leftist liberal agenda of the East and West Coasts does not play well in their congressional districts.
 
A friend of mine and I grew up in an explorer type environment and were discussing what kids do today vs when we were growing up. We played dodgeball with a basketball while lined up against an old brick building. When we aimed our goal was to inflict pain on the person standing up against the brick wall. lol. We were given knives at the age of 5 or 6, hunting rifles then too. We'd jump off roofs, stick things in electrical outlets, clean fish with a very sharp knive....yes all before the age of 10. We played in barns, jumping out of lofts, played in silos, drove riding lawnmowers, swam in ponds while things were biting us. We'd go to the er with some regularity. Ride our bikes over ramps while doing the no hands thing, with no helmets. Played football and baseball in the street with no helmets. Built things with wood and with real nails and hammers. Played in abandoned shacks and refrigerators, aimed bottle rockets and roman candles at each other, shot each other with the old daisy bb guns Went sledding behind trucks that pulled us through the snow on public roads. Were bitten by dogs, and got into fist fights without being expelled from school, climbed water towers, and hung tobacco. And we always kept score.

I loved this post, reminded me so much of our childhood in the city. We lived not far from Holmesburg prison and they used to dump old ammunition in the creek by the Delaware River. We kids would wade in, and carry the ammo home, where we would saw off the shell and make bombs. Seems hard to believe in this day and age, I still have scares from one that wouldn't go off till I got too near. Any building, any tree was a challenge, anyone who hasn't hopped a train or road through the snow hanging low on a car bumper hasn't lived. :badgrin:

http://www.politicalpass.com/2006/02/the-olympics-for-city-kids/
 

Forum List

Back
Top