By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kantor said:
richardhutnik said:
SamuelRSmith said:
The real question is: should the wife of a man who was elected by 30% of the population, be able to tell 100% of the population what their kids eat?

And you also support direct Democracy to, right?  

If you want to argue for populism, and the majority dictating things, it is not best to do it off the basis of a population facing an obesity epidemic.  Well, unless you feel obesity is a good choice.

You prefer the idea of a lawyer with no scientific background dictating things to said majority?

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/snacks-usdas-solution-healthy-school-lunch-protests/story?id=17324285#.UGULLpjO3h8

If you want to get cute, then it would be the first lady vs high schoolers.  So, no, you want high schoolers to be able to FULLY to be able to dictate completely where tax dollars go for their food.  You want them to vote on this.  Either you believe they will make wiser choices or that the guidelines are stupid.

Reality is that the USDA's plan includes more vegetables, complext carbs and less junk food.  That is the meal proposal and 750-850 calories for lunch, and the ability for kids to go back for seconds on fruits and vegetables.  And it is based on the advice of nutritionists who are experts in the area.  But you don't believe in nutritionist guidelines apparently.  So, so much for your arguing about scientific background.  You seriously should look into what is behind here, rather than bite into the first line you find convenient.