To: reaganaut1
2 posted on
02/08/2011 9:06:38 AM PST by
BenLurkin
(This post is not a statement of fact. It is merely a personal opinion -- or humor -- or both)
To: reaganaut1
“There’s no such thing as a ‘free lunch’”.
3 posted on
02/08/2011 9:07:29 AM PST by
Uncle Miltie
(0bamanomics: Punish Success, Reward Failure. Destroying America is the point.)
To: reaganaut1
Here's an idea -- say "Here's your food; where's your money? You don't have the money? Then I can't give you this food."
This actually works in the real world. They should try it.
4 posted on
02/08/2011 9:08:29 AM PST by
ClearCase_guy
(BO + MB = BOMB -- The One will make sure they get one.)
To: reaganaut1
The cruel and heartless government starving poor children.
5 posted on
02/08/2011 9:09:52 AM PST by
artificial intelligence
(Your data will be processed by me for future input. Thank you.)
To: reaganaut1
Let the parents buy a linch ticket first...duh...
To: reaganaut1
We all gonna get free lnches, 'cuz we got OBAMA now!
7 posted on
02/08/2011 9:10:37 AM PST by
WayneS
(Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. -- James Madison)
To: reaganaut1
Maybe I'm just an old grouch, but back when I went to school, my mother would pack me a peanut butter and jelly sandwich to take to school each morning and I'd eat it at my desk when teacher said it was time for lunch. If the kid next to me had a bologna and cheese sandwich, maybe I'd swap with him if I was tired of peanut butter and jelly.
If we wanted a "hot lunch", we'd put our sandwiches on the windowsill if it was a sunny day.
10 posted on
02/08/2011 9:14:03 AM PST by
SamAdams76
(I am 32 days from outliving Vince Foster)
To: reaganaut1
I worked for five years as a lunchroom lady in my kids’ elementary school.
The abuse of the free and reduced lunch program is rampant.
The kids whose parents were honest and didn’t try to game the system did sometimes have debt or came without money.
We were allowed to let them have lunch up to 5 times without payment. After that we were not allowed to give them a lunch.
When they came through the line, we would have to remind them that they owed money and then take the food from them and send them on their way.
This was embarrassing for these kids and they became almost afraid to come through the line in case they owed and couldn’t get food.
The school had no problem with this humiliation of these poor kids.
But, one could be reprimanded or even fired if one was caught revealing which kids had free or reduced lunches!
We must not humiliate the little darlings by telling their peers that they were too poor to buy their own food.
14 posted on
02/08/2011 9:19:20 AM PST by
Jvette
To: reaganaut1
How much can it cost to make a big pot of gruel for the kids whose parents won’t pay?
15 posted on
02/08/2011 9:21:42 AM PST by
nina0113
To: reaganaut1
Here they get free PB&J for about a week or so if they can’t pay the lunch fees. After that, cut off.
18 posted on
02/08/2011 9:23:59 AM PST by
mquinn
(Obama's supporters: a deliberate drowning of consciousness by means of rhythmic noise)
To: reaganaut1
Pay? For Food? I have a right to eat and the government should provide!
I hear they have some leftover brats at the White House...
19 posted on
02/08/2011 9:29:10 AM PST by
ltc8k6
To: reaganaut1
I wonder how those Cheeeldren will handle credit when they grow older....
20 posted on
02/08/2011 9:30:41 AM PST by
MaxMax
To: reaganaut1
Let’s do the math:
2200 students
1900 get FREE lunch
And the remaining 300 get hounded for nickles, dimes and quarters.
To: reaganaut1
How many familes which “can’t afford school lunch” happen to be able to afford things like Cable TV, broadband Internet and computers, smartphones, cigarettes, alcohol or illegal drugs.
25 posted on
02/08/2011 9:39:10 AM PST by
pnh102
(Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
To: reaganaut1
Here’s a thought, don’t serve the lunches until they have been paid for and stop the “free” lunches for the free loaders. When I was in school the poor kids(of which I was one) brought their own lunch, it was usually better than what the school had anyway.
27 posted on
02/08/2011 9:47:23 AM PST by
calex59
To: reaganaut1
“we’re in the business of feeding kids”.
I thought they were in the once noble profession of teaching kids?
I guess not.
To: reaganaut1
so, the department of education is also responsible for:...
establishment and maintenance of restauraunt facilities...
clean up of garbage and trash from premises...
security of building and said occupants...
limosine and other transportation to and from facilty for all that attend...
and I thought schools were a place for learning....
43 posted on
02/08/2011 10:11:23 AM PST by
joe fonebone
(The House has oversight of the Judiciary...why are the rogue judges not being impeached?)
To: reaganaut1
What part of “if they don’t pay, stop feeding the little #&@*s” isn’t clear?
46 posted on
02/08/2011 10:40:04 AM PST by
ArmstedFragg
(hoaxy dopey changey)
To: reaganaut1
I have a different problem. The school officials have ordered my kids to buy lunch and then billed me for it. Once the school was open for a half day only, so we just gave them a snack (juice and crackers) instead of a sandwich. School rules kick in and I start getting automated calls every day for each child telling me I owe money (but not telling me how much). Once we ran out of bread so we gave one of the kids pop tarts, crackers and juice. Once again the school ordered that a lunch be bought. In no case was the lunch actually eaten. What we gave was tastier and what they wanted anyway.
50 posted on
02/08/2011 12:33:29 PM PST by
conejo99
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson