BOP
Well-Known Member
Or, high calorie non nutritious foods at State Dinners, fund raisers, and on vacation. I don't begrudge The First Lady as having a cause as all First Ladies have had, but she picked the wrong cause. She cannot defend it, set a good example, nor do Americans like to be dictated to, as in what they eat; also, considering her own children don't eat like that at Sidwell Friends or in the WH. Maybe, if she tried to set the rules for what food an EBT card can buy; that might be a different story. She should have picked a charitable cause to stand behind like helping the poor, helping children to read, helping veterans, helping the homeless, and on and on. She has caused much disdain with her cause, and a lot of food being thrown in the trash. Her cause is ridiculous and costly, and can't even be monitored as to how it is affecting the health of the children.
The cause itself isn't necessarily a bad one, but like most progressives (and politicians in general), she did not do any research, nor any studies, or consider any fallout or unintended consequences. Or, if she did, the results clearly supported the conclusion she'd already reached.
Typical of her political kind, she saw a problem, decided what the answer was, and moved to declare a solution, regardless of the impact to the people for whom this solution was supposed to "help."
Don't forget, for the FLOTUS and her political ilk (we haven't used "ilk" in a while), legislation is magical; the mere act solves all problems and they can feel good about themselves, no matter what the real world affect that legislation has on real people.
Last edited: