More Nanny State Intrusion
Apr 14, 2014 Political
New rules will go into effect this July and those rules will ban all junk food from schools. We are not talking just banning the food in vending machines or in the cafeteria (the food served there) no sir, we are talking about no junk food on the premises.
This means that school children will not be able to take a candy bar or bag of chips to school whether it is part of the lunch they brought or not. It means that parents have no say at all in what goes into their children’s lunch. This is the nanny state.
It is up to parents to decide what to give their children. If the school wants to ban the vending machines or cafeteria that is the school’s business but what a child brings to eat is between the child and the parents.
I see no problem with so called junk food being part of a balanced lunch so long as that is not the only food. Chips or pretzels go well with a sandwich and children can burn those calories off. If they want to encourage children to be healthy then they should put recess back in school.
In any event, how will this square when the school wants children to sell candy bars or pizzas as part of fundraising activities? Will the girl scouts who use the school for meetings be able to sell (and eat) their cookies?
Parents and students should decide and do as they wish no matter what the school says.
It would also be good for them to refuse to participate in ANY fundraisers (regardless of what is sold) to make a point about the entire process.
Source:
The Weekly Standard
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: intrusion, junk food, nanny state, recess, schools
News From The World Of Politics
Feb 12, 2010 Political
Obama Won’t Play Nice At Recess
When Barack Obama was a Senator he was part of the minority party and that party, rather than give an up or down vote on Bush nominees, filibustered them. When John Bolton was nominated to the UN, Obama and the Democrats worked to defame the man and then filibustered his nomination. George Bush appointed him during the Congressional recess.
Barack Obama said that Bolton was damaged goods which was a Democrat theme. The idea being that any appointee not confirmed by the Senate was damaged (the DU agreed with this). Now that Republicans have played the same game with Obama nominees (some Democrats joined the Republicans) Obama is talking about making recess appointments to key positions. Verum Serum
So will these appointments be “damaged goods?”
Roland Martin of CNN has suggested that Barack Obama go gangsta on the Republicans with regard to the recess appointments. The funny thing about this is that Martin completely ignores Obama’s history of doing the very thing Martin wants him to go gangsta on. Obama seems oblivious as well:
If the Senate does not act — and I made this very clear — if the Senate does not act to confirm these nominees, I will consider making several recess appointments during the upcoming recess, because we can’t afford to allow politics to stand in the way of a well-functioning government.”
It was perfectly OK for Obama to allow politics to stand in the way of a well functioning government when he and his fellow Democrats were the ones doing it.
I Wonder How They Would Feel If Someone Tracked Obama By Cell Phone
The Obama administration is arguing that people have no reasonable expectation of privacy with regard to their location if they use cell phones (which can locate the proximity of the user, even if it is not actively being used for a call).
In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking is permitted because Americans enjoy no “reasonable expectation of privacy” in their–or at least their cell phones’–whereabouts. U.S. Department of Justice lawyers say that “a customer’s Fourth Amendment rights are not violated when the phone company reveals to the government its own records” that show where a mobile device placed and received calls. CNET
It seems to me that Obama was concerned about phone records being obtained by the Bush administration. When Obama took the Bush administration position and voted not to hold the companies responsible for honoring the request, Keith Olberman talked about how courageous it was. He talked about Bush as if he were Hitler over the very same issue.
But I digress. Should the police be able to obtain this information without a warrant that demonstrates probable cause? Evidently the Obama administration thinks so.
Budget Freeze In New Jersey Sends Chills Up Democrat’s Spines
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has ruffled the feathers of Democrats by freezing the state budget and cutting the budget in areas where money has been abused and where excesses exist. Christie promised to make New Jersey more fiscally responsible and the Democrats are not happy about that.
They are upset that he is doing this by executive order rather than the legislative process (he declared an emergency, not wanting to let one go to waste). The legislative process under the Democrats there is what caused the problem.
Let’s see how New Jersey does and then decide if Christie is doing the right thing. At least he is trying to get his arms around the out of control spending, something that has not happened in the past.
I bet New Jersey will see better days in the future.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: cell phones, chris christie, new jersey, Obama, Privacy, recess