I can't BELIEVE some DU'ers are against Obama cracking down on school vending machines.

[Bicoastal]

Setting aside the argument that Obama can't work on more than issue at a time, which is simply absurd, there are those who are convinced that this is a case of the federal government overstepping its bounds in public schools. IMO, nothing could be farther than the truth.

During my last year before college, our public high school had an alley of about 12 vending machines in a row, exclusively selling soda, chips, cookies, ice cream, cup o' noodles, and so on. We also had vendors from Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, and a few others on campus. And during lunchtime, both of these venues were SWAMPED with students...

Here's the problem. Some of us had parents who made us lunch every day (or forced us to make it ourselves). But other parents were just plain lazy. Not poor, necessarily--sandwich bread, apples, and carrot sticks are pretty cheap--but LAZY. They'd give us a few bucks, and tell us to buy whatever we wanted. And despite the presence of the cafeteria, most headed STRAIGHT to the vending machines and the vendors. The school's own lunches never had a chance: after all, the junk food had the bright colors, the advertising, and the sugar on their side. The cafeteria had...warm food.

Now, if you think about it, parents aren't legally required to teach their children much of anything that will help them in later in life; only schools are saddled by the government with the responsibility of preparing kids for the future. Thus, it is entirely appropriate for our nation's public schools, spearheaded by the President, to improve our childrens' future by keeping them healthy in the present, and moreover, I think if our country's education department isn't doing all it can to do prevent our kids from obesity, heart disease, dental problems, etc. NOW, then they're really only doing half of its job.

Kids at public schools don't generally get to make a choice between studying American History and watching Transformers 2; they shouldn't get to make a choice between nutrition and the most insanely unhealthy crap known to man.

[FourScore]

1. K&R

[NYC_SKP]

2. Recommended! nt

[samplegirl]

3. Michelle is taking this effort on

How dare her take on something worthy.

[Cha]

4. It's not just obesity..it's all the

other aliments that are associated with poor nutrition over a period of time.

Ideally, kids could get a good start in their health as well as their education. I'm happy they agree this is so important..and thank you for your OP, Bicoastal.

[rocktivity]

5. The problem isnt the machines themselves, but what's in them

Replacing the junk with healthy foods and fruit juices will solve the problem. Learning how to eat properly and exercise regularly are two of the things kids should be learning in school--that helps solve the obesity problem on the front end. Let them eat junk on their own time.


rocktivity

[Bicoastal]

7. Well, yeah, technically you're correct...

...but in my experience, a good 85% of those machines have nothing but junk in them.

Most are DESIGNED to house pre-packaged food. Healthy, organic foods need to be kept cold (or warm), and need a special kind of vending machine to house them in. These are generally larger and, I'm guessing, more expensive than the kind you see in most office break rooms...

[muriel_volestrangler]

50. No, I think the machines are problems too - marketing and capitalism intruding eveywhere

Putting machines in a public space, with an almost literally captive market - you get in trouble if you skip school - and saying 'buy another product'. And doing it at an impressional age, so that people grow up expecting a constant stream of products around them.

[Tumbulu]

6. Excellent post-

what important points and well stated. Thanks.

[Toucano]

8. My favorite was when Coke and Pepsi compete for a school's contract

They always promise "athletic equipment" as if that makes poisoning the children okay.

[JoeyT]

48. It would at least mitigate the damage somewhat

if the equipment were for general use. Which is never how it works out.
What they give is money and equipment for sports teams.

[Donnachaidh]

59. my son's dumbass high school starts foaming at the mouth when you offer athletic anything

Doesn't matter that ALL their teams suck, and the kids cannot write much beyond a 6th grade level when they graduate. And lots of them are getting fatter by the day, due to the vending machines and the school cafeteria that was turned into a food court like the mall has!

[MrMickeysMom]

9. Abso-damn-lutely...

I would have loved to have done this years ago when I taught in secondary ed.

Sometimes it's easy to just drink something... Okay, so make some kind of choice that offers nutrition! The current model of what exists costs us later.

[freeplessinseattle]

10. In jr. high in SLC, UT we had candy and pop

while at both high schools I attended in WA only had pop machines. I missed my Bit-O-Honey and Chewy Sweettarts (can't remember how often I got them, probably too much, but do remember those were my candy of choice, so attached I was to them).

It's not like I couldn't just buy them at the store and bring them to school, but having them right there luring you so conveniently definitely increased my consumption. Those were probably the worst kind for cavities, too.

[Fumesucker]

11. That's what a lot of kids eat at home..

It wouldn't surprise me to find that many kids will just skip eating altogether if they have to eat some of more unpalatable cafeteria food.

Keep in mind that a lot of this junk food is addictive, you wouldn't expect to take an addicts drug away from them and then expect them to act normally.

Frankly I'd rather have kids eating junk food at school than nothing at all and that just might be the choice a lot of kids would make.

I have a feeling this junk food problem is going to be more difficult to solve than many people think it is.

[TexasObserver]

12. Who would think giving kids machines with candy and cokes could go wrong?

Coke and Pepsi bought off the school boards. You know that scoreboard by the football field? Coca Cola paid for it and got concessions for concessions in return.

[earthside]

13. Local school boards.

I hear people complain that parents don't involve themselves in their childrens' education ... then the same people wanting officials in Washington, D.C. to decide what those kids can eat in school.

It's like a vicious circle. Parents aren't involved enough so let the federal government make the decisions ... parents see how they become powerless to determine what goes on in the schools so feel less compelled to get involved, so on and so forth.

The idea in this country was that some things were meant to be controlled by communities, towns, cities, and states -- not by an all powerful central government. You don't have to be a "states rights" wacko conservative to understand that some things are best left to the people closest to the action.

So, yes, a reactionary Republican in Texas ought not be deciding what snacks get put in my kids school vending machine in Colorado. And if stupid people in Alabama want to let their kids eat Twinkies, well, sheesh, let them suffer the consequences of their decision.

[Toucano]

18. "...some things are best left to the people closest to the action."

And when they don't act, as they are not, we should just let things go to hell?

If the state is doing something about the issue, fine. Salute them and support them (as I understand Colorado is).

But when they are not? When they prefer to finance their budget shortfalls through the lifelong endangerment of young citizens, please feds, step up to the plate.

[hfojvt]

14. you mean there are some DUers who think

that schools should be locally controlled by school boards and states rather than by the President?

Or there are some who say 'viva la junk food'?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

15. And I can't BELIEVE some DU'ers are supporting Obama over reaching on school vending machines

Its a blatant over reach of Federal authority. We did not like it when Bush did it in other areas, why should Obama get a pass when he does it in this one, even though it is with noble intent. Having the first lady do it is clearly a superior approach. She has no legal authority so it is by persuasion which is legal and will get there more effectively and sooner. Obama is better off spending his wanning political capital on other matters where there is no viable alternative.

Most school I have been to, including the ones my daughters attended did not have/allow the use of junk food vending machines during lunch. While some quoted noble reasons like nutrition, the real reason is most likely to stop competition with the cafeteria services which need customers to cover costs. That covers the lazy parent canard in the OP.

If the first lady wants to push this, that is clearly the best course. Hopefully Obama will be smart enough not to over reach and give his detractors more ammunition.

[JCMach1]

17. Exactly!

[Toucano]

19. With all due respect, I think the situation might be different than when your daughters

were in school.

My last experience in a public school was about 5 years ago, and it was vastly different than when I was in school.

I mean, if we wanted refreshment, there was a water fountain and outside of a birthday or other festivities, no food was consumed outside of the cafeteria. Not even gum!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

23. As was mine...

An it was then that I got the gouge that one of the concerns was not enough business for the cafeteria was one of the big concerns.

This clearly is not a Federal matter regardless.

[Toucano]

27. If the state of Alabama doesn't want to regulate contamination in their water supply

does it become a federal issue?

Say the school officials are on kickbacks from Coke (which the are, in a way) and so there's political gridlock to realizing necessary change.

I think there is clearly a case to be made for the federal government to step in. The good old, often cited, interstate commerce act.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

31. So only the Federal government is immune from outside influences?

That is the logical conclusion of your position.

[Toucano]

39. Not at all.

We've seen in recent years, the federal government be highly moved by outside influences. Invasion of Iraq? Pretty much.

Is there some evidence that the Soy Joy people are lining the feds pockets to exert their authority on the school snack issue?


I haven't heard about that, but I do know that Coke and Pepsi promise schools the moon and the stars to get them to agree to policies that jeopardize the long-term health of school kids. The health of those youths will be a federal expense at some point, of course.

Parents go along with it.

Maybe some entity further removed - who won't directly profit - can avoid the sphere of influence.

[Hekate]

41. Professor: as school funding has dropped, these vending machines make money for the school. The cafe

The cafeteria isn't (or shouldn't be) designed as a money-maker at all, but for providing 1/3 of a growing child's or teen's daily nutritional requirements and an affordable price.

The fact that school boards would make up the tax shortfall by charging kids for a bottle of water (instead of maintaining the free drinking fountains), and by asking companies like Coke and Pepsi to compete for contracts is unconscionable.

Childhood diabetes, which used to be very rare is now on a steep upward climb. High blood pressure. Clogged arteries.

This isn't a joke. School cafeterias don't "make money" any more than the history class does, unless they are privatized away from their original mission, and then compete with the vending machines by serving crap like fish sticks.

IIRC, the impetus for the first school lunch programs came about because a staggering number (40%) of WW II draftees were rejected because of ill-health from childhood malnutrition. Night-blindness, severe dental decay, rickets, and more.
(One link of many http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_School_Lunch_Act )

Today we see malnutrition's effects from the other side: children who are not underweight but obese. They don't present with rickets, they present with diabetes and the beginnings of heart disease.

This IS a Federal matter: the cost in both misery and money is going to be (is already) enormous. If we as a country can't protect our kids from predatory advertisers and predatory manufacturers (Joe Camel comes to mind), just as we once instituted child labor laws and freed the mill-children, just as we try to protect them from flying through the windshield of the family car -- I don't know. Who ARE we, then?

Hekate

[ProgressiveProfessor]

53. The cafeteria programs in most schools (internal or externally run) is supposed to break even

It is not the responsibility of the school district to ensure that students are getting proper nutrition and education funds should not be subsidizing the meals served, though some overhead expenses are normally covered by the district budget and possibly capital improvements as well.

Federally subsidized meals are a means to address those who can not/do not get adequate food at home. It has nothing to do with vending machines.

What I find most disturbing is the attitude that local officials can not/do not/will not care about the children in their care and need the Feds to mandate "approved behaviors". Its NCLB all over again and we all know how well that worked. This like NCLB is also getting considerable traction among some Democrats. Lets not forget who championed NCLB from our side of the aisle...

[Hekate]

54. We are adults. They are children. When did you go to school, K-12 I mean?

Was nutrition addressed in NCLB? I personally don't know because at the time it came out I was focused on the mandated reporting to DOD and the one-size-fits-all testing.

Your avatar is the Hawai'i State flag. When did you go through elementary and high school, and did you do so in Hawai'i?

I entered Kainalu elementary school in 1957 (5th grade) and graduated from Kailua high school in 1965. Hot school lunches were offered at 25¢ a plate, cooked on site in a functioning kitchen from fresh ingredients. Lunch was so cheap even my own mother couldn't do better with homemade.

Milk, meat from recognizable sources, veg, fruit, rice, and bread were on the plate. Dessert (like an ice cream bar) was extra. A second carton of milk was extra. More scoops of rice for hungry boys were free. By design, it was supposed to meet 1/3 of the daily caloric and nutritional needs of a growing kid.

Every single year, from 6th grade through 12th, I spent one or two full days out of class and in cafeteria duty as did everyone else in the school with full use of their limbs. Under supervision, students did all the scut work like peeling carrots, scrubbing out the giant rice vats, and mopping the floors at the end of the day. I honestly don't recall any bitching about the menu, although personally I never liked the green curry or the watercress. Maybe the lunch ladies just knew how to cook for hundreds.

The fact that we didn't have snack machines meant we arrived in line with an appetite and with our lunch money still in hand. So yes, it IS in part about vending machines.

Adjusted for inflation (1960 - 2010) that would be $1.84 today. Incredibly affordable.
http://www.dollartimes.com/calculators/inflation.htm

As a community, Kailua was neither rich nor poor, though individual circumstances varied a lot (my parents were pretty broke). This was not some kind of voucher program reserved for the needy, although kids whose families couldn't afford 25¢/day could sign up to be lunch servers and earn a free lunch, which they ate along with the rest of us who had been dragooned for the day (yes, we were "paid" 1 free lunch and 1 mid-morning snack of juice and some kind of cookie).

What's the point of this ramble along Memory Lane? It's this: This is not uncharted territory; we've done it before, and we don't have to reinvent the wheel. Are we as a nation more poor and incompetent today than we were 50 years ago? Or is it that our attitudes toward children have become less caring and more punitive?

At one point the adults in this country thought that investing their tax dollars in kids -- even other people's kids -- was worthwhile. The statewide public school hot lunch program had to have been underwritten somehow (I was a kid, I don't know), but it was never designed to "make money." (The business model is the wrong paradigm for education in any case.) The fact that all students were under the same umbrella meant we all benefitted and marginal families like mine didn't have to go through some needs-based assessment to qualify; and for those few who had to, it was simple: serve lunch--eat lunch. Somewhere there were adults who recognized that good nutrition for all kids raises the prospects of the whole society.

I'm framing this as kids and adults because that's the crux of the matter to me. It all resides with the adults: power, tax money, knowledge, experience. If you think kids already "know enough" to make wise choices about nutrition, why not imagine they already "know enough" about US History or driving a car or any of a myriad of other subjects that adults are supposed to clue them in on, again and again, until the lessons stick?

Hekate

[ProgressiveProfessor]

58. Its clearly the NCLB paradigm all over again.

School lunches even back in the day were centrally run on Oahu. Kailua was no different than Farrington or Kalani. Even then, the lunches were supposed to be a break even proposition. Federal subsidies for poor children date back to the late 40s and are not really a factor in terms of meal content, then or now.

I think having good meals for kids is important. So do parents and educators. No one in the educational systems is trying to short their students in terms of nutrition. However, school cafeterias are not an area for Federal mandates and control any more than the classrooms are. We used to get Hawaiian style foods growing up for lunch. Locally produced and quite nutritious. If school lunch programs become the next incarnation of NCLB, you will never see that again.

NCLB is a paradigm and a process that needs to be discarded.

[JCMach1]

16. I don't think it's any of the Federal Gov.'s business

I remember the situation in the 1980's. Cafeteria food was horrific and you had to wait in line almost 20min during a 30min. lunch session.

To make a long story short, I never ate lunch in High School. Instead, I spent 30min. in the library or talking with friends.

I don't think government will ever be any good at telling kids what to eat...

I also give you an example a tale of my two daughters. Both were brought up with the same (hopefully good) information about nutrition and food.

Daughter 1: Has huge food issues (probably related to aspergers). You can count the number of foods she will eat on two hands. A number of those are unhealthy, some aren't. If foods she doesn't like aren't there, like me in high school she simply won't eat at all.

Daughter 2: Has virtually no food issues. She loves green fresh veg and salads and will eat virtually anything else. Whatever is there and good, she will eat it with no prompting.

There needs to be some choice. At least here in the UAE, daughter 1 can choose a cappuccino and some raw broccoli (I know she's weird, what can I say).

[Bicoastal]

20. Since when do kids deserve a choice in their education?

If they had a choice, no one would come to school at all. If they had a choice, they'd dump math and history and watch TV all day. I wasn't a kid long so long ago that I know that, if completely left to my own devices, I'd invariably make a lot of wrong choices--because growing up is about learning that you can't always get everything you want.

Well, my argument is that nutrition is PART of their education. And their choice should be cafeteria food or what they bring from home.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

21. You are presuming that the Federal government is the only choice to enforce your vision

a bit presumptuous don't you think?

[Bicoastal]

25. The Fed already does plenty to put pressure on states to ensure the safety of minors.

I've been researching laws on smoking for the last half hour, and the while there isn't an outright ban to keep the under-18 set buying a pack (presumably it would be unconstitutional), there's plenty of pressure from the Fed to make states comply--including using emergency FEMA care as leverage.

While you may or may not agree with such wielding of Federal power, there's no end of precedence in this area.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

34. There is indeed a lot of precedents for Federal over reaching, the Bushies did a massive amount

of it. Does that mean its a precedent worth following? Having the first lady push for it is a vastly superior solution.

[Hippo_Tron]

24. At a certain age you have to give them some choices

Yes you can decide what they eat in elementary school. By high school if you are still making that decision for them, they are going to be completely incapable of making the decisions they will have to make as adults in just a few years.

[cherokeeprogressive]

26. Damn straight. White cotton button-up shirts over blue slacks, and blue plaid skirts for the girls.

Fuck what they might want. They're certainly not old enough to make decisions for themselves.

[Bicoastal]

33. Well, I'm not convinced that a kid's appearance has an impact on their physical well-being.

But in many cases, kids AREN'T old enough to make decision for themselves. That's why we don't let them drive, buy drugs and alcohol, join the army, post naked pictures of themselves online, etc. past a certain age. And I'm sure you probably agree with at least some of these limitations on a minor's freedom...

If our nation's kids weren't suffering from a veritable obesity epidemic, I might take your line. But something clearly needs to be done to level the playing field between billion-dollar junk food corporations and healthy meals at the cafeteria.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

35. Your seem to be hooked on Federal action as the only means

more that a bit presumptuous at the least

[JCMach1]

36. Exactly, what about parental responsibility?

AND what about local control of education?

I shouldn't have to remind anyone that NCLB was brought to us by the Federal Gov., not local school systems.

[sandnsea]

62. Have you read one single word of the plan? n/t

[Hippo_Tron]

22. At what age do we turst kids to actually make these decisions, though?

Okay so we ban vending machines in elementary schools when the kids are ages 6-11, that's fine. But high school seems a bit ridiculous. How can we expect 18 year olds to be legal adults with the responsibilities that come with that if we can't even expect 14 and 15 year olds to use a vending machine responsibly. As soon as they get out of school there are going to be vending machines everywhere.

And I gotta tell you, I would've slept through a lot more early morning English classes in 11th grade if I didn't have convenient access to a diet coke on days when I didn't get my morning coffee. And for those who want to tell me get more sleep, it doesn't help. I just can't function at 8am without stimulants and when I was 17 it was even worse.

[woo me with science]

66. Thank you. When exactly did education get replaced by control?

These are high school kids we are talking about, for pete's sake.

When I was in high school, it was a big deal to reach the 10th grade, because that gave you permission to leave the school grounds for lunch. We used to walk to a nearby shopping center where we had lots of choices ranging from fast food to a deli to actual restaurants.

Students at the same high school today no longer have that option. Now you are telling me you want to restrict their choices even further?

School is a place to educate, but what is being proposed here is control. Adolescence is a time when kids should have some freedom to practice making their own decisions about all sorts of things, including the food they choose to put into their bodies.

I swear, I get so tired of this reflex to infantilize young people until the day they are 18. Wrap them in bubble wrap until then, control their movements, shield them from any negative emotions/experiences/consequences, and make sure they are not exposed to anything that could possibly harm them - including sharp objects, off-color jokes, or fatty foods. Keep them safe and protected until age 18, when they will emerge from their cocoons magically able to make all these decisions, without practice, for themselves.

If obesity is a problem, the solution is education. Teach nutrition in school. Educate. These kids will be moving into a world where they have endless choices about what to eat. Give them some freedom and some practice in managing those choices.

Don't replace education with control.

Let these teenagers have a damned vending machine.

[Hannah Bell]

28. how is it the president's job to fight vending machines in schools?

[Bicoastal]

29. Fuck, I hate it when I argue to the limit of my constitutional knowldege.

Never mind. It's late anyhow.

[Hannah Bell]

30. i disagree. it's the local community & parents' job to monitor what their kids are eating & local

conditions like vending machines in schools.

as for the president's job being "whatever the hell he wants it to be" -- it's bullshit.

[cherokeeprogressive]

32. That's an interesting opinion you have about executive power. Would you mind terribly

if I asked you to point out where in Article II it's "roughly" stated that his job is "whatever the hell he wants it to be"? Because I can't find that part. I've looked, numerous times, but I can't find it.

Help me out?

[blogslut]

37. The problem isn't the machines

The problem is why the machines are there in the first place. Our public schools are severely underfunded and schools have been forced to accept underwriting contracts from snack and soda manufacturers in order to cover costs.

[Toucano]

40. Maybe the schools who pimp out their students to Coke would like to have their federal funds cut

a little further?

There's a difference in being enticed and being forced.

But I do agree with your point that the schools are severely underfunded.

[blogslut]

42. I would prefer the schools were fully funded by local, state and federal

It isn't just the federal government that's at fault. How many times have school-funding bond measures been voted down in your town? How many times have the citizens of your state voted against an increase in taxes that would have benefited public education? I'll lay odds that wherever you live, the answer is too many times.

The funds for our public education system shouldn't be at the mercy of self-interested voters, small-minded politicians or opportunist private interests.

[Toucano]

43. Well put! n-t

[Hekate]

38. VERY well put! Thank you for the common sense. nt

[4lbs]

44. When I was in high school 20+ years ago, we had vending machines all over campus, selling sodas and

chips/candy.

We also had two special areas where kids in the school's ASB (Associated Student Body) sold soda, chips, cookies, and candy from several stands throughout the campus. I was one of them.

Regardless of the business the vending machines did, we still sold about $100 worth of "garbage" food daily, in each location. With items costing about 50 cents back then, that's 200 items of junk per location, daily! This was a school of about 1800 students.

I remember there were kids that would forego the $1.00 lunch in the cafeteria and instead buy a soda and a Snickers bar for their 'lunch' from these stands.

So, go after the vending machines, AND these individual stands should the school have them.

[EFerrari]

45. This is a local issue, not a federal one. If the Obama's have ideas

they'd like to present for consideration, that's great. They will probably be good ones.

[paulsby]

46. i usually decry nannystatism but i agree with you

the case with high school kids can be summed up with three words: in loco parentis.

because of this principle, the school has a duty, and it is entirely appropriate for them to do this.

iow, it's ok to be a nanny, when you are the surrogate parent (see: in loco parentis)

[Kaleva]

47. Would children's health noticeably improve if the vending machines were removed?

Would it have any impact at all? The profits from vending machines in my local school go to help fund extra-curricular activities.

[JoeyT]

49. Part of the problem is

that people are claiming that it's vending machine/vendor crap versus healthy and balanced meals in the cafeteria.
When I was there I remember everyone going for the cafeteria "pizza". I put it in scare quotes because it could best be described as cardboard coated with a layer of tomato sauce that was about a molecule thick, with a slathering of white paste that they swore was cheese. On top of which floated enough pooled grease to lubricate a truck. There was sometimes enough on one rectangle of pizza to fill a shotglass, which is about 2 ounces. With us being such serious students, that was the only system of measurement we had handy at the time.

Maybe we could pull a Reagan and claim corn syrup is a fruit?

[madokie]

51. some of our so called democraticunderground folks are simply not democratic voters

and don't and won't like anything a black President has to offer no matter what it is.

And yes its as simple as that.

[D23MIURG23]

65. fail.

[blueworld]

52. I can't believe you can't believe it; Believe me. I'm more believable n/t

[MadHound]

55. From a health and nutrition standpoint I have no problem yanking the machines, however

From an economic standpoint I have a huge problem. The revenues from those machines fund some of the cool stuff about school, band trips, debate tournaments, lots of extracurricular stuff. In some cases that money even goes to fund the basics, lights, heat and such.

So, if the federal government is going to yank those machines, great. Just so long as they replace that revenue stream. Otherwise you're just defunding our schools even more.

[tonysam]

56. I can't believe anybody is for food fascism and hysteria over "obesity"

There are health food nutballs in the school districts as well. I used to teach cross-category life skills, and I used to have my students make cookies to sell during the lunch hour, which my predecessor started. This project taught kids EVERYTHING they needed to know about life skills: measurement, cooking, selling, counting change, and so forth. But then the crazies took over WCSD with their bigoted "wellness" program, and so we could no longer sell cookies on campus during school hours. I gave up on the project because I wasn't going to sell fucking trail mix that is high in sodium and that nobody would buy.

I am old enough to remember Adele Davis and her crackpot nutrition theories and good old Jerome I. Rodale, founder of Prevention magazine, who happened to die of a heart attack at the early age of 72 while on the "Dick Cavett Show" in an episode that never aired. I have no use for people who subscribe to health food and medical quackery.

[4lbs]

57. You are right. We should also ignore the benefits of jogging and running because the person

credited with starting the craze in the 1970s, Jim Fixx, died of a heart attack while jogging, at the age of 52.

See there! Running is actually bad for you. Don't jog!

Puhleeze. Rodale died at the "early" age of 72? You might have a point if he died in his 40s or 50s, but 70s? In addition, he bragged about falling down a flight of stairs the day before the show. Hmm... ever think that fall might have contributed to his death a day later? Possibly dislodged a clot that eventually made it's way to his heart and clogged the artery supplying the heart with blood, causing the heart attack. Or it could have been a stroke (once again caused by a dislodged clot) misdiagnosed as a heart attack. The description of how he acted and appeared shortly before certainly is that of a stroke more than a heart attack.

[pitohui]

60. i doubt the cafeteria had warm food if you had to stand in line for it

in my day there were no vending machines, you ate the school lunch or nothing

for three years, for me, it was nothing, i'm not spending 30 minutes of a 50 minute lunch hour standing in a fucking line to eat the same garbage they sell to prisons nor would any other intelligent high school student

taco bell would have been a big improvement on nothing, at least it would have been calories

if you think not wanting to eat school lunch is just about vending machines you didn't go to high school or at least not a public high school

[D23MIURG23]

61. Honestly, I think this is a false dichotomy.

Back when I used to go to public school there were no fast food vendors, but the cafeteria food was hardly what I would call nutritious. Beyond being relatively disgusting, the food items I remember being most common were pizza, hamburgers and hot dogs. Its probably good for kids to be getting nutritious food at school, but I don't know that simply throwing vending machines out of school is the way to accomplish that.

I'm not well informed on the specifics of what Obama is doing in this regard, but if it is (as you say) primarily an effort to crack down on vending machines, I think his time could be better spent on other issues.

[dysfunctional press]

63. schools have to find ways to fund themselves.

vending contracts can bring in a lot of cash.

[Johnny Harpo]

64. I Can't Believe Obama Has The Time To Be Concerned About School Vending Machines

Don't get me wrong. Vending machines in the schools needs to be a concern. For the local school boards...not the President.

There were no vending machines in the schools when I was a teen-ager. And God forbid if any of us were 'caught' with a can of pop/soda.

But I fail to see, given all of the things that are broken in this country right now, how this 'issue' should even make it to the Presidents desk.