Home / Education / Backlash Against Michelle Obama’s Public Schools’ Menu
Print Friendly and PDF

Backlash Against Michelle Obama’s Public Schools’ Menu

Written by Gary North on September 9, 2014

Prior to Eleanor Roosevelt, no first lady was a public figure. The term “first lady” was not capitalized. First ladies stayed in the background. Eleanor Roosevelt became the first full-time First Lady nag, both for her husband and for the nation. Her husband ignored her, but liberal Democrats kept her on a pedestal long after her husband unexpectedly left office.

Bess Truman and Mamie Eisenhower did their best to restore the older tradition. Nobody ever heard from them. But then came Jacqueline Kennedy, the best-dressed woman ever to grace the White House. She even gave us a tour of the White House on national television. From that time on, First Ladies have been expected to do something both useful and noncontroversial. Each First Lady is supposed to select some national do-good project, and devote her public life to it. I suppose the best example of this was Lady Bird Johnson’s cheerleading for planting flowers along federal highways. That seemed innocuous enough, as long as you were not in the road sign business.

Now we get Michelle Obama. She picked the most controversial topic in First Lady history: nutrition. She is serving as a cheerleader for new federal regulations being forced down the throats of America’s schoolchildren. She wants them to stop eating things that will make them fat, rot their teeth, and generally be worth paying for.

The idea that federal regulations can make fat people thin has to be the most utopian idea in the history of national do-goodism. Nothing else comes close. The one thing that we know about fat people is this: 95 percent of them do not get thin and stay thin. In other words, this project is utopianism on a scale — pun intended — never before seen in the White House. Lyndon Johnson’s war on poverty was an exercise in political realism compared to Michelle Obama’s attempt to slim down America’s schoolchildren.

The project has backfired. School districts around the nation have found that snacks that comply with new federal regulations cannot be sold to students. Students want to use their snack money and cafeteria money to indulge their tastes, and healthy foods do not indulge their tastes. So, school districts are suffering losses of income as a result of the new regulations.

Parents really don’t want federal bureaucrats interfering in an area of parental authority that doesn’t exist. Parents learn very early they have zero control over what their kids eat at school, unless they pack a bag lunch. Now comes Michelle Obama, who has become the #1 national nag in an area in which parents have proven incapable of getting their children to pay any attention for the last 70 years.

I can think of no project in the history of federal reform that has had less likelihood of achieving anything except political backlash than this one.

She hitched her wagon, not to a star, but to an exploding cigar. Of federal projects most guaranteed to blow up in her face, and in her husband’s face, this one has to be the capper. This woman is so utterly devoid of judgment, both politically and socially, that it makes you wonder why she was paid $317,000 a year after her husband was elected to the United States Senate. (http://bit.ly/MrsO317k)

I think it is appropriate that she was paid this salary as an employee of a hospital. When we think of “hospital food,” we do not think “I’ll have seconds.” She has taken the menu of the typical hospital’s kitchen and has transferred it to America’s public schools.

Mrs. Obama has achieved what the conservative movement around the United States has been unable to achieve for the last 70 years. Her program is leading local school districts to turn down federal funding. Conservatives been trying to get local governments to do this ever since the end of World War II. They have been totally unsuccessful. But Mrs. Obama has achieved it. Who would have guessed?

And so we read local articles such as the following.

School nutrition experts in Nebraska are struggling to comply with new federal snack regulations championed by First Lady Michelle Obama.

“I think we’ve gone too far, too fast,” Diane Zipay, director of nutritional services for the Westside School District told KIETV.com. “And I don’t think it’s a real-world environment. We might have changed the school but we haven’t changed the child or our world.”

The federal snack rules take effect this year for school districts across the country that participate in the federal free and reduced lunch program. They restrict snack foods sold at schools to those with at least 50 percent whole grain, with low sugar, fat and sodium content. Each snack must also come in under 200 calories, according to the news site.

That means a lot of popular snacks are now off the table, including donuts, brownies, potato chips, full flavor pop, candy bars, and most other foods teenagers prefer. Even salt shakers and packets are now illegal.

Zipay told KETV.com the new rules not only greatly reduce the available snack options schools can offer to students, they defy the concept of moderation that’s important for students to learn.

“I want kids to feel like they can have an apple one day and a Snicker’s bar the next. And that’s OK,” she said. “You cannot buy a Tic Tac in a Nebraska school, I checked.”

The new snack rules are a continuation of a federal school lunch overhaul in 2010 promoted by Michelle Obama as a means of combating childhood obesity, but instead of making kids healthier, the new regulations are driving a record number of students away from school lunches.

Recent reports show more than 1 million students no longer buy school lunches because of the new restrictions. The regulations are also creating more than $1 billion in food waste annually because students are now forced to take fruits and vegetables they don’t want.

In many cases, public schools have lost so much in lunch sales district officials have opted to forfeit federal lunch funding to serve students foods they’ll actually buy, and eat. Just last week, Illinois’ second largest school district opted out of the National School Lunch Program, as did two New York school districts, among others.

She is the incarnation of liberalism’s ultimate mantra: “If you know what’s good for you. . . .”

We know what’s good for us. We just don’t want any. Liberals, sensing this, add sticks to their carrots.

School districts are rejecting federal carrots. That leaves only sticks.

Mrs. Obama’s husband will be long out of office when school children buy apples rather than candy bars. Fundamentalists have a term for this era: the millennium. They think Jesus must return to govern it personally. This is beyond Mrs. Obama’s managerial capabilities.

Continue Reading on eagnews.org

Print Friendly and PDF

Posting Policy:
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

49 thoughts on “Backlash Against Michelle Obama’s Public Schools’ Menu

  1. hanginjudge says:

    Why doesn't the government just mandate that the kids eat the "nutritional" meals or put the school kids in jail. Oh wait a minute that's plan "B", right after they jail the parents for not teaching the liberal manifesto! Global warming, Obama is king, conservatives hate everyone, have all the money and want to enslave blacks. Better get with the program folks! Your welfare checks depend on it!

  2. We have two foreign exchange students living with us for this school year. For the first day of school I told them they could either brown bag their lunch or eat the school lunch. Typical of teenagers they took the easy way out and choose to not make a lunch but just buy it at school. When they can home from their first day they both asked what they could pack for lunch from then on. I asked why the change of mind and both told me that the school lunch was the worst thing they had ever tried to eat and they never wanted to try it again. Moochelle has just motivated two teenagers to make an extra effort and do something they don't have to do so I will give her a lot of credit for that.

  3. How dare you question the Queen.

  4. So you're basically saying that wives should shut up and stay in the background, and not contribute anything to society? You're a tool, Gary.

  5. "So you're basically saying that wives should shut up and stay in the background, and not contribute anything to society?"

    A woman can still contribute to society even if she shuts up and stays in the background. They can have babies and raise them Shane.

    "You're a tool"

    Shane describes himself perfectly here.

  6. Hi, me dino. School lunch is people! School lunch is people! Yum, except for those yucky carrot sticks on the side.

  7. wrote the gov. here in MI. told him to stop this now it s a waist of MY TAX money not the obamas when they pay for it not ME than they can waiste all they want, till tn stay OUT of are lives, the hot dog, cheesbuger beer drinking, and dont forget, cookie eating, lying 2 faced FAKES.

  8. Horace T McFarly says:

    Someone needs to shove an enema in her mouth.

  9. Well if it ends up they turn down the fed funding because of the 'liberal lunch program’ and find ways to finance it themselves and throw down the government yoke… Imagine that?

    What qualifications does Mooch actually have anyway?

    The country must stop electing Lawyers [both parties] and get real people in positions of power LOL Now if we got smart and put into place, “with approval rating [Congress] less than 50% no incumbent can be reelected,” that’s the ticket!

  10. She a HE..real name is Michael LaVaugh Robinson ( transgender).

  11. trixiefire says:

    nothing wrong in promoting healthy eating, but let kids be kids. I used to eat this sugary stuff out of tubes before swim meets. I didn't become obese. I also ate something that the contents of still confuses me today- bologna sandwiches. Growing up in the midwest, we ate steak a lot. I had to put ketchup on it. How delighted I was when the USDA said ketchup in school lunches was a vegetable! Let kids eat what they want, they will figure it out later

  12. Since Michelle reared her ugly head and inserted her idiot menu my children now take their lunch and snacks to school because otherwise they come home hungry!

  13. Schools could make a spaghetti sauce that has green peppers, tomatoes, celery in it, along with cheese – the kids would eat that. Mine did. Apparently the money should go for decent cooks, not food.

  14. Helen Allen says:

    I've said it once I've said it a hundred and one times. Michelle needs to butt out and take care of her two kids, if she knows how. She feeds her two, as well as adding to her fat mouth and huge butt: hot dogs, hamburgers, pizza, ice creams, donuts, soda's, Mexican foods, candy and what ever else she can stuff into their young bodies. No one elected her to any office and someone needs to send her a message, "Stay out of our children's lives. You need to go away and stop interfering where you are not welcome and do not know what you're talking about." "Start with your own two and leave the parenting to the parents, who knows a heck of a lot more than you will ever know."

  15. hanginjudge says:

    I guess she needs something to do besides going on vacations in order to make herself feel important. We have a world in chaos and the clowns in DC spend their time telling the citizenry what to eat, wear, and what temperature to set their thermostats at. Since when are these national concerns?
    Unfortunately this is what happens when morons are elected of public office!

  16. Uh…government Skrools ARE jail!!! Where have you been?

  17. Consentman says:

    "…snacks that comply with new federal regulations cannot be sold to students. Students want to use their snack money and cafeteria money to indulge their tastes, and healthy foods do not indulge their tastes. So, school districts are suffering losses of income as a result of the new regulations."

    In other words, schools don't care about helping students become healthy: they're only interested in making money. They're saying feed them crap and let them go to doctors to get well! This is typical of the political and corporatist mind frame. On the other hand, having the government dictate what students and eventually everyone, will eat is also bad. So. what's the answer?

    Better marketing. Everyone must have a choice: good or bad, people must be able to choose their actions. This authority came from God not the government: it's called consent. And people will have to accept the consequences of their choices. But better marketing would help. For example if you want students to eat an apple instead of a candy bar, lower the price of the apple against the price of the candy bar. Maybe by even as much as half the cost. The play is that the school may be able to sell two apples vs one candy bar and still make money. I don't know what the actual prices are so someone will have to do the pencil work. But you get the idea.

    The bigger picture however is this: what makes the government think that any food they supply is better than what we can supply. Is an apple better than a candy bar? Is that an organic apple? Is that corn they serve GMO corn? Is that fruit laced with antibiotics? Is that candy bar full of high fructose corn syrup or soy?

    If the government wants people to eat healthy, why are they raiding roadside markets which sell fresh fruits and vegetables? Must be they only want the big conglomerates to supply food. Are local farmers going to supply the fruits and vegetables to the schools? Are those local farmers growing organic foods?

    And that seafood that may be offered in the schools: Is it from the western coast of the USA? Yes, I'm concerned about radiation coming from unstoppable Fukyshima. I understand that the seafloor is dying: radioactive tuna, low herring counts, starfish absent, etc. And is the Gulf any better? What the heck is going on here?

    This gets complicated. Best to let the people decide what they eat and from where.

    Bottom line is that government should stay out of dictating choices for people. The Feds were to only supposed to protect our country from invasion.

  18. We elect Presidents not their wives. They have no purpose except to accompany the President and smile. This useless broad thinks shes somebody and has power by proxy. She needs to disappear into the background like a Preside tial consort belongs. Not trying to create malnourished children with her garbage menus.

  19. She has no authority to tell anyone what to do?? Why are we listening to her.

  20. She is not contributing she is demanding in areas that parents and states can determine the children's meals
    and what is taught in schools today. Common core is not what we should want in our schools for our children think out 20 years what will our world be like. That is a scary thought.

  21. Jeanne Stotler says:

    SO right, she thinks she is "Mother" to the whole country. Funny I managed to feed my kids without the gov't. telling me what they could or could not eat, they are all adults, healthy and productive.

  22. I'd like to know who the idiots were who thought they had to do her bidding and mandating in the first place. She has NO authority to push her ideas and regulations on anyone. I wonder what kind of lunches her daughters eat.

  23. Thanks for your comments, I AGREE with all . You have already expressed my sentiments, Hang in there with Gods Help they may soon take there leave from OUR HOUSE in Washington,DC..

  24. hanginjudge says:

    Sorry but I've been out of skool so long that I'm able to understand math. If the teacher gave you a whack you never told your parents because you'd get another one from them.

  25. hanginjudge says:

    Good chance that they'll grow up to be conservatives too if you play your cards right!

  26. I looked at some of these new lunches – they had so little fat & protein you wondered if they weren't designed by dieticians from "The Biggest Loser."

    Kids are often fed 'lunch' before 11am, & with the meals I saw they'd be hungry again within a couple of hours.

    A peanut butter sandwich from home would stick around longer, and be far cheaper.

  27. Don't think he was saying anything about house wives. I think he was saying non elected wives should stay out of politics unless they get elected to office.

  28. Michelle's idea was to make a radical change in the menus. That doesn't work, kids need gradual changes to adapt to new foods, She tossed out corn, most kids like corn and made the meals smaller. She doesn't realize that for many kids, the school lunch is the only decent meal they get that day (thanks to her husband's disastrous economy) so cutting back on the lunches is not the way to go. If she wants to raise a stink about something, she should go after the food manufacturers for the junk and chemicals they put in snack foods, kids cereals and drinks. These empty calories are the culprit behind childhood obesity, not the school lunches..

  29. No, Shane, Dr. North is saying -once again – "Count the costs".

    Think you can, maybe, not use profanity? All it tells me is that at the moment you are thinking in a coarse and foolish manner. You can do much better.

  30. Mrs. Obama did not "Count the Costs" to herself and to her husband's career.

    There are so many issues she might have championed – literacy, African American graduating rates, teen pregnancy, AIDS or some other worth cause.

    She had to pick the one issue with the least payoff and most intrusiveness.

    We cannot pay for this kind of publicity – sometimes the Good Lord does work in mysterious ways!

  31. Their task, Jackie, is to support their spouses. That is their task due to marriage.

    We did not elect them. We hope that they will support the one whom we elected.

    Mrs. Obama's support to her husband is like a cement life vest.

  32. If I were a young man I'd be smuggling in tasty snacks for cash. Just like illicit drugs but much more moral.

  33. We brougjt this on ourselves many years ago when we began looking for govt. to solve our problems. Now we are reliant on them to do it all, and they tell us they can. We gave our authority to them. No one should be surprised at them taking control
    l and we have no one to blame but ourselves.

  34. Random Dude says:

    Today is my daughter's birthday, she's in third grade, and she wanted to bring cupcakes to school to celebrate, but we were told that's illegal now. So instead, we're bringing apple slices. Yeah, because that's what kids want to eat for a birthday celebration, apple slices. So stupid.

  35. The apples and other fruit is free for the students, but not for the teachers. When I was told my last year that I would have to go up the street to get food that I could eat, I said, "Fine!". I took food orders from my assistants and they ate up in my classroom with me. We had to keep it secret because I couldn't help everybody. Somebody can run a food truck up to Allderdice selling anything that is food and make a fortune.

  36. No, you don't! You couldn't eat like them. Too expensive. But then, they have to be paid off. Try a genetic test on either kid. They are not really bozo and Moochie's kids. All of DC knows this also. What type of fix is in?

  37. I wouldn't send anything. The kids will hate your daughter for this. Why not send liver bits instead?

  38. Watched C-SPAN last weekend when the discussion was that of school lunches. The woman in charge of the program in Detroit was SO proud that they were ahead of the game and had switched to "healthy foods" before the requirement. They all agreed that kids are getting used to whole grains and are liking them more and more. Senators questioning these people (those that were Democrats anyway) felt it was the duty of schools to teach kids about nutrition. I'm beginning to wonder why children have parents! My suggestion is that if we are so worried about 1 in 3 children being obese, why aren't we requiring food stamp recipients to ONLY purchase fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. That would solve the problem! They wouldn't snack and would eat less. Oh wait, they would use THEIR money for foods they like.

  39. My question is….How come children aren't accustomed to healthy food in their homes, so that they would think
    nothing of it when having it at school??? Children's diets are terrible these days. I am on the opposite side
    of the fence politicly from M.O. but I did think she had a good idea. It was done in the wrong way. It should have been
    mixed with some treats. HOWEVER! FYI! Sugar is toxic to the body & CANCER feeds on sugar!

  40. Oh no, that means the the Michelle Food Police will have to arrest the parents for not forcing their children to buy and eat the lunch selection.

  41. None zippo she had to give up her law degree and isn't qualified to work at mcd's or any other fast food chop shop
    and does not have a degree in nutrition, just wants to make other suffer for her fatass

  42. Harry Snyder says:

    There was a horror movie "Soylent Green" few decades ago. (There were other colors, too) People were to live on something like "People Ration."
    I didn't think it could really happen—Not so sure now. But this coerced menu is a step on the way to it. That Obama would give his missus such authority is not surprising, though. I believe his mania for power could lead him to give her such power as to dictate diet and nutritional "mandates" on us ordinary folks, his own menus bearing no similarities, of course……

  43. I agree with Bea. Why haven't they changed what can be purchased with Food Stamps? Instead, people are now able to buy all of the junk food in convenience stores, too!

  44. paratrooper says:

    why does everyone refer to her as first lady. she is not a lady. she's the first woman perhaps and even that's in doubt. she could actully be the first 'mike' as many have suggest.

  45. I disagree that Moochele has even successfully made these inedible meals "healthy". It seems her intention was only to make them unpalatable. Meanwhile, she and her daughters certainly look overfed. I wonder how much of that swill they eat?

  46. And that used to be forbidden.

  47. There's nothing good about a federal govt that wrests power from parents and dictates children's diets. The schools used to serve beautiful lunches when I was a kid, AND they were nutritious too. The whole snack idea came later and I think it should be stopped. Schools are no place to be peddling candy bars and soda pop.
    They should sell a balanced lunch with milk or water. They could have fruit and some ice cream available for a snack. That's how it always was when school districts actually cared about the kids.

  48. You can also thank the feckless, brainless John Boehner and the rest of Congress for actually voting to make a law that authorizes this abuse of the citizens and our tax dollars. Moochele could not have done this without their approval and passage of the "Healthy, Hunger-free Kids Act" (as always, a propaganda title), that ribber stamped her destructive ideas.

  49. Did you know that neither Moochele nor his/her "husband" has a valid license to practice law, even though both purport to be lawyers?