Feds To FINE Schools Who Don't Follow Michelle's Lunch Rules...

[Centinel]

Really? Tell me one instance of anything that I have said that is not true! I have taught for 19 years, in three different states and six different school districts.

Conservatives have a huge flaw when it comes to education. They often feel intellectually inferior to their teachers all of their lives, so they make up shit to make themselves feel better about themselves.

When the states established their union, they delegated to it a small set of powers. These are enumerated in Art I, section 8. If you peruse this small set of powers, you won't find within it any power to be involved with the education of the people of the several states.

The fed gov has no business being involved in our local schools.

 

[Camp]

Can schools opt out of receiving federal funds for their lunch programs and hence be not obligated to follow the strings attached to receiving those funds?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Really? Tell me one instance of anything that I have said that is not true! I have taught for 19 years, in three different states and six different school districts.

Conservatives have a huge flaw when it comes to education. They often feel intellectually inferior to their teachers all of their lives, so they make up shit to make themselves feel better about themselves.

When the states established their union, they delegated to it a small set of powers. These are enumerated in Art I, section 8. If you peruse this small set of powers, you won't find within it any power to be involved with the education of the people of the several states.

The fed gov has no business being involved in our local schools.

So exactly where did you get from my post that I disagreed with that assertion? If you take federal money, you abide by the rules. School districts should refuse federal funds for their school lunch programs and they will be free to do as they wish.

 

[Centinel]

So exactly where did you get from my post that I disagreed with that assertion? If you take federal money, you abide by the rules. School districts should refuse federal funds for their school lunch programs and they will be free to do as they wish.

I'm glad we agree that congress has no constitutional authority to interfere in education. Which means that there is no constitutional authorization to give money with strings attached.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

So exactly where did you get from my post that I disagreed with that assertion? If you take federal money, you abide by the rules. School districts should refuse federal funds for their school lunch programs and they will be free to do as they wish.

I'm glad we agree that congress has no constitutional authority to interfere in education. Which means that there is no constitutional authorization to give money with strings attached.

That is where I disagree. If you dance to the tune, you must pay the piper. The easy solution is don't dance.

 

[Ame®icano]

De Blasio promises to sign New York City chewing tobacco ban

anyone heard about this ban?

Big Brother Gone APE SHIT:

No Large sodas
No Chewing tobacco
Buy THIS Health care
Eat THIS Food
Buy THIS toilet paper


I'm just waiting for Obama and the Libs to try to outlaw every political party except theirs and any ideas and opinions but theirs.

They're already doing that, slowly... it's starts by calling everyone a racist. Because everyone but them is racist.

 

[Ame®icano]

You have to love the communist-in-chief. They won't do a damned thing about sanctuary cities, or states allowing the sale of narcotics, but they are pissed about school lunches.
Sounds EXACTLY like Obama.

Why not to fine schools that underperform?

Oh wait, we can't, that would be racist.

 

[Ame®icano]

Just another reason the DOE should be abolished and the schools be given back to the states.

Everything should be given back to states, beginning with repealing 17th amendment.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Can schools opt out of receiving federal funds for their lunch programs and hence be not obligated to follow the strings attached to receiving those funds?

They can, but who in the world says "NO" to free money?

At least over here, our schools are run by school board members. These are politicians who are elected by the people. Like all politicians, they face scrutiny by their challengers who want their job.

Saying no to money is a good way of losing that job. When schools don't have enough money, they ask for more from the voters. In our area, that means increased property tax. I vote every one down because over half of my property tax goes to our schools which me nor my tenants have children in.

 

[Camp]

Obviously the money

Can schools opt out of receiving federal funds for their lunch programs and hence be not obligated to follow the strings attached to receiving those funds?

They can, but who in the world says "NO" to free money?

At least over here, our schools are run by school board members. These are politicians who are elected by the people. Like all politicians, they face scrutiny by their challengers who want their job.

Saying no to money is a good way of losing that job. When schools don't have enough money, they ask for more from the voters. In our area, that means increased property tax. I vote every one down because over half of my property tax goes to our schools which me nor my tenants have children in.

Obviously, the money isn't free. In exchange for the money the school board abrogates the authority over determining the school menu ingredients to the people supplying the money. The problem with the menu, if there is one, rest with the local school board, not the folks supplying the money at the request of the school board.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Obviously the money

Can schools opt out of receiving federal funds for their lunch programs and hence be not obligated to follow the strings attached to receiving those funds?

They can, but who in the world says "NO" to free money?

At least over here, our schools are run by school board members. These are politicians who are elected by the people. Like all politicians, they face scrutiny by their challengers who want their job.

Saying no to money is a good way of losing that job. When schools don't have enough money, they ask for more from the voters. In our area, that means increased property tax. I vote every one down because over half of my property tax goes to our schools which me nor my tenants have children in.

Obviously, the money isn't free. In exchange for the money the school board abrogates the authority over determining the school menu ingredients to the people supplying the money. The problem with the menu, if there is one, rest with the local school board, not the folks supplying the money at the request of the school board.

It's still free money, but yes, there is a tradeoff.

That's where politics comes to play. A challenger to a school board seat certainly won't explain this tradeoff to the constituents. They simply say "so and so rejected federal money, and now local taxpayers have to come up with it." Most voters won't dig into the matter to find anything further.

So what the hell? They'll take the money and live under the federal rules. After all, school board members don't have to eat the crap the school cafeteria serves. It's not their problem.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Obviously the money

Can schools opt out of receiving federal funds for their lunch programs and hence be not obligated to follow the strings attached to receiving those funds?

They can, but who in the world says "NO" to free money?

At least over here, our schools are run by school board members. These are politicians who are elected by the people. Like all politicians, they face scrutiny by their challengers who want their job.

Saying no to money is a good way of losing that job. When schools don't have enough money, they ask for more from the voters. In our area, that means increased property tax. I vote every one down because over half of my property tax goes to our schools which me nor my tenants have children in.

Obviously, the money isn't free. In exchange for the money the school board abrogates the authority over determining the school menu ingredients to the people supplying the money. The problem with the menu, if there is one, rest with the local school board, not the folks supplying the money at the request of the school board.

It's still free money, but yes, there is a tradeoff.

That's where politics comes to play. A challenger to a school board seat certainly won't explain this tradeoff to the constituents. They simply say "so and so rejected federal money, and now local taxpayers have to come up with it." Most voters won't dig into the matter to find anything further.

So what the hell? They'll take the money and live under the federal rules. After all, school board members don't have to eat the crap the school cafeteria serves. It's not their problem.

Don't vote for them! Or even better, run against them!

 

[jon_berzerk]

Dictatorship raises its head more and more...
Next we'll be told what toilet paper we can use.

that is what happens when you resign the course of your life

over to the federal government

in the end they will tell you IF you can use toilet paper

not WHAT toilet paper