Posted on 08/04/2014 11:28:05 AM PDT by Nachum
“Put Down the Cupcake: New Ban Hits School Bake Sales” a Wall Street Journal headline warned. The Daily Caller blamed the first lady: “Michelle Obama’s Meddling In School Lunches Now Causes BAKE SALE BANS.”
But no, the government isn’t waging a war on brownies. School bake sales haven’t been banned as some recent headlines have suggested. Nor does little Johnny have to bring carrot sticks instead of cupcakes to share with classmates on his birthday.
New rules requiring healthier foods in public schools took effect July 1 as a result of the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act passed in 2010. They set nutrition standards for all food and drink sold during the school day, including “competitive foods” — government language for vending machine snacks and bake-sale goodies.
The standards, which dictate how much fat and sugar food sold on school grounds can contain, do extend to snacks sold as fundraisers. That raised the hackles of some state school superintendents, including John Barge of Georgia, who called the rules an “absolute overreach of the federal government.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
That’s right. We are arguing over cupcake sales because liberals want to make sure we are getting vitamins and minerals and adequate fiber intake from products sold at school bake sales.
YEP
YEP
Is this another of those lame “don’t blame her for a law she championed and lobbied to be passed because she’s just a private citizen” articles?
What is healthy hunger? People who speak English want to know. (Directed at the article - not you!)
Michelle Antoinette says “let them eat arugula”.
The fda in response to the law that was passed that she pushed.
She did not do it herself. Others did it for her.
She was glad to brag on it, however.
Actually, it's not. All it takes is one zealous school official and they can use this to ban anything they don't like (bake sale wise). The rule says what it says, and eventually some liberal will use it as a club to push their agenda.
Actually, it's not. All it takes is one zealous school official and they can use this to ban anything they don't like (bake sale wise). The rule says what it says, and eventually some liberal will use it as a club to push their agenda.
IIRC BOTH the House, and the Senate belonged to the Democrats in 2010 when the legislation was passed for this constitutionally questionable law, as well the First Wookie along with her husband the play acting President initiated the support for the bill.
How in the ‘H’ can this author possibly write such BS?....nevermind, she’s a Democrat. THEY can say anything they want to.
Uh, sounds to ME like the Obama Fascists DO want to control our food.
This is not a function of the federal government.
Shove it Michelle.
Regardless what FDR's activist justices wanted everbody to think about the scope of Congress's Commerce Clause powers in Wickard v. Filburn, a previous generation of Constitution-respecting justices had clarified that the states have never delegated to Congress, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate intrastate commerce.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
As a side note concerning the federal government's constitutionally limited powers, please consider the following. The states would sure be a dull, boring place to grow up and live in if parents were to make sure that their children were taught about the federal government's constitutionally limited powers as the Founding States had intended for those powers to be understood. /sarc
Thomas Jefferson had put it this way:
“Cherish, therefore, the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, judges and governors, shall all become wolves [emphasis added]. It seems to be the law of our general nature.” - Thomas Jefferson (Letter to Edward Carrington January 16, 1787)
In fact, forget about traditional salesman / sucker cliches like "buying the Brooklyn Bridge." Voters now have to deal with the problem that they have foolishly traded their votes for constitutionally nonexistent rights, federal spending programs and restrictive federal regulations which are likewise based on constitutionally nonexistant federal government powers.
Perfect extension of logic (or in the case of libs: anti-logic)
I'm guess my school is far from the only one...
You betcha. It would make a very effective campaign ad. And most people could relate to it. But wait...the GOPe won't do it because someone at MSNBC might say it's a racist swipe at Michelle.
tell me again, what is the basis of her power to tell people to do anything?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.