I've told the story before that on one trip to Florida with my (then) family of four, we went to a restaurant and ordered one breakfast for the entire family. It was astounding. The single person's breakfast came with coffee, juice and milk, toast, two eggs and pancakes. There might have even been cereal or a muffin with it. Anyway, all four of us could not finish the one breakfast.
Remarkably, the issue of obesity versus fit and healthy is really a class issue in the United States now. Lower class people are fatter and more inactive, and yes-it's because they eat crap all the time-simply massive amounts of crap. The people who are really fat aren't exactly cooking regular, healthy meals. They aren't shopping for veggies (even the cheap ones-seriously, a head of cabbage is about a dollar). They are porking down the fast food, the soda, the candy and sitting on their rumps for most of the day.
And PLEASE do not give me the thyroid problem lecture. Been there, done that-thyroid whiners have to get over it. I'm also not interested in the "genetic" excuse. ZZZZZZZZZ.
The thing I really am wondering about is why on earth Americans need cafeteria lunches in school at all?
Is it some kind of American tradition that I don't know about? Does every school have to offer lunch to schoolchildren? Is it against the law not to have full meals available at public schools?
Kathy sent me this awesome audio clip of Mark Levin going completely ballistic on this issue.
When I went to public school we brought our own lunches. In a lunchbox or brown bag.
When I got to (public) high school, we did the same thing. Our cafeteria had the most disgusting food on the planet-the only things that were moderately edible were the cookies. Sometimes we went out, but most of the time we sat in the caf with our home-made lunches.
A lunch program at a public school means that the government is de facto more involved in your child's health than you are-in nutritional terms.(Ditto of course for breakfast programs.)
"We know it is important that students get the calories and nutrition they need to stay alert and energized through the day, and schools are doing a number of things to make sure this happens," wrote Dr. Janey Thornton, USDA's deputy under secretary for food, nutrition and consumer services.
What kind of first world country needs a "deputy under secretary for food, nutrition and consumer services". America has willingly surrendered to the nanny state Lunch Gestapo.
Why is that the default setting in America?
People are complaining now about the new regulations.
But if meals at a public school are a mandatory part of the day, then American parents have already acquiesced their children's nutritional health to bunch of bureaucratic morons who are eager for a bigger slice of their lives as well.
Are Americans that helpless, and that befuddled so as not to be able to pack a lunch for their kids?
(Not sure if I want the answer to that question...)
There should be no lunches in public schools.
The fight should not be about WHAT they are serving at your schools.
The fight should be about NOT having the government involved with something as important as what your children are conditioned to eat.
The fight, my friends, should be to get the government the hell out of your lunchboxes.
