[Steve_Seattle]

"Conservatism is not about removing choices and personal responsibility because the nanny state feels people are too stupid to have freedom. You've been duped."

Public schools exist, and they have lunchrooms, and it is nothing new that those lunchrooms have a menu that includes some things and excludes others. This is not about the "nanny state," about giving radical new power to the government, but using the government's existing authority to make better choices about what is offered in school lunch menus, to protect the health of children. I am not a food prude who things people should never have sweets, but it is very unhealthy for children to drink soda as an everyday drink with virtually every meal. In case you haven't noticed, there is a virtual epidemic of obesity and Type-2 diabetes in this country, and it is affecting people at a younger age every year. I am not prepared to concede that protecting the health of children is a liberal issue that conservatives should oppose. I think it's silly and reactionary to oppose healthy lunches in schools.

[mysterio]

It is nothing more than an extension of the war on smokers. This is the beginning of a war on obesity that will see government making many food choices for us and trying to control the way we eat. Government cares more about these issues now because we demanded they pay for our health care. So we have given government a blank check to try and control our unhealthy habits.

If you think any of this is about health, you've been duped again. It's about money, power, and control. The well of smokers is running dry, so now they have to drill a new one. These are just the first tentacles of that monster.