Current state of US vs. other times in US History

[BigRedBuster]

51 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

And finally, regarding the lack of faith in the intelligence agencies and other institutions, do you really feel that people feel that way because of Trump?... Even after the intelligence agencies lied about WMDs in the middle east so people would support going to war? Even seeing how federal courts, universities, and intelligence agencies have become infiltrated with leftist ideologues? I know that convo could get into the weeds quickly.... 

 

To the first bolded.  No.  I think the vast majority of Americans still respect our agencies and trust them.  Do they make mistakes?  Sure.  Every organization will.  But, Trump has kept his base specifically because he has been able to convince them that all of our intelligence agencies are corrupt left wing deep state and he should trust what Putin says over them.  

 

FYI...his base isn't the majority of Americans.

 

Something went wrong with the WMDs.  If you remember, during the Clinton administration, intelligence regulations were put in place where we were not allowed to have agents working with "bad people".  So, we were not allowed to have agents in a lot of these places where we needed intelligence.  So, we were relying on our allies.  I'm not convinced that some of our "allies" didn't feed us bad information to help tear down our status in the world.  So, I'm not convinced the problem was within our agencies.  Now, if you want to talk about how it was sold to the UN and America from the administration....that's a whole other story.

 

To the second bolded.....Wow.......just wow.......That's real deep state stuff there.

[ActualCornHusker]

19 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

That doesn't work in today's world. A collective meal offered by trained cooks is the simplest, most efficient way to feed children at school. The most cost-effective, too.

 

Who said there wouldn't be cooks?... The entire process would work the same way it does now - but the individual communities would have the final say on what food actually gets served to the students rather than being mandated by D.C.... How would that not work in today's world?...

[knapplc]

1 minute ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

Who said there wouldn't be cooks?... The entire process would work the same way it does now - but the individual communities would have the final say on what food actually gets served to the students rather than being mandated by D.C.... How would that not work in today's world?...

 

Aside from costing more by not increasing their buying power, what would the bold accomplish? Decisions out of DC aren't hurting school kids, so there has to be some other reason for this?

[ActualCornHusker]

20 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

This part made me think about this.  

 

LINK

"He has a very, very powerful office, and the framers wanted it that way. That's why they required for impeachment very strict criteria to be met," he explained.

 

 

 

THAT... could not be more wrong...

[funhusker]

2 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

Who said there wouldn't be cooks?... The entire process would work the same way it does now - but the individual communities would have the final say on what food actually gets served to the students rather than being mandated by D.C.... How would that not work in today's world?...

The "school lunch argument" is one of the stupidest things ever.  I've worked in schools before, during, and after Obama's program.  In my schools, there was no noticeable change EXCEPT that a salad bar was added where kids could get as many veggies/fruits as they wanted.

 

Kids could still bring whatever crap they wanted from home in a cold lunch.

[ActualCornHusker]

14 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

Aside from costing more by not increasing their buying power, what would the bold accomplish? Decisions out of DC aren't hurting school kids, so there has to be some other reason for this?

 

11 minutes ago, funhusker said:

The "school lunch argument" is one of the stupidest things ever.  I've worked in schools before, during, and after Obama's program.  In my schools, there was no noticeable change EXCEPT that a salad bar was added where kids could get as many veggies/fruits as they wanted.

 

Kids could still bring whatever crap they wanted from home in a cold lunch.

 

It's one example, guys. It's not the main point. But I'll maintain that there is no reasonable reason for the government to dictate what schools can and can't serve for lunch. I've seen too many kids (specifically athletes) who are not served adequate protein or calories as school lunches currently exist. Yes, they can replace or supplement with food from home, but they shouldn't have to as a result of federal guidelines that shouldn't exist anyways... Again, it's ONE example

[funhusker]

3 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

 

It's one example, guys. It's not the main point. But I'll maintain that there is no reasonable reason for the government to dictate what schools can and can't serve for lunch. I've seen too many kids (specifically athletes) who are not served adequate protein or calories as school lunches currently exist. Yes, they can replace or supplement with food from home, but they shouldn't have to as a result of federal guidelines that shouldn't exist anyways... Again, it's ONE example

This was true 30 years ago.  I had to eat two lunches a day.

[NM11046]

I do think back to the ole' Nutritional Pyramid from my school days - a cornerstone.  Wasn't that a government initiative?

 

And I think there is a lot of data out there showing in more urban areas there are less fruits and veggies in general (at home and school) mostly because of cost.  So by there being some baselines there are opportunities to level the playing field per say with those in Des Moines and those in LA having the same core nutrition available via national funding.

[NM11046]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

I read this paragraph and stopped here to respond.  I will finish reading and respond accordingly.

 

The question you pose in this paragraph isn't as simple as it seems.  And....from your posts in the past, I believe there is a misconception about where the line is between news and opinion.  Even in your first sentence, it's cloudy.  

 

If I go on Foxnews or CNN's website, there are lots of articles that aren't sensationalized about various things going on around the world.  It's not Hannity or Don Lemmon writing them after getting off the phone with Obama or Trump telling them what to say.  When I just went on Foxnews website, I found lots of articles like this. However, the general design of the site and which articles are front and center, appear to all be decided by Hannity.  You actually have to search through a lot of crap to find them.  It's clear by the design of their website, they are really pushing support for Trump and trying to sell everyone on how wacko liberals are.

 

Now, when I just went to CNN, I don't see that.  I see a very large percentage of the articles that are fact based and specifically telling what is happening in the world.  

Here's another big difference between the two.  When I go on Fox News, I immediately find at least two articles trashing other networks.  They are front and center when you open the site.  When I open CNN, I specifically took about 3-4 minutes scanning through the headlines and never saw another network mentioned.  

The entire myth that Main Stream Media is fake has been propagated by one side and for the most part, is a myth.  

 

So, on their websites, one is crowded by a bunch of BS.  The other is pretty well fact based.

 

Now, if I go on both networks in the evening?  They are both pretty bad.  This is where it gets cloudy.  That's not "news".  That's "opinion".  Problem is, way too much of America doesn't understand the difference.

 

 

The interesting part is that Fox exists for the sole purpose of promoting a conservative agenda.  The other news stations may slant now, but they were formed as NEWS entities.  

 

Fox started with their intent at impacting US politics then took the "flashy" tips from the TMZ-like stations and just reeled everybody in.  The blondes in skirts, the grumpy old men - they capture their audience and then just spoonfeed them talking points disguised as "news".

[knapplc]

22 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

 

It's one example, guys. It's not the main point. But I'll maintain that there is no reasonable reason for the government to dictate what schools can and can't serve for lunch. I've seen too many kids (specifically athletes) who are not served adequate protein or calories as school lunches currently exist. Yes, they can replace or supplement with food from home, but they shouldn't have to as a result of federal guidelines that shouldn't exist anyways... Again, it's ONE example

 

So the solution is to replace those federal guidelines with local guidelines. 

[BigRedBuster]

58 minutes ago, funhusker said:

The "school lunch argument" is one of the stupidest things ever.  I've worked in schools before, during, and after Obama's program.  In my schools, there was no noticeable change EXCEPT that a salad bar was added where kids could get as many veggies/fruits as they wanted.

 

Kids could still bring whatever crap they wanted from home in a cold lunch.

There  was a big difference in our lunches after Obama’s regulations. I had three kids who were athletes in the school at the time. They actually took our salad bar away because the scaled dressings didn’t meet the standards.  My son wasn’t allowed to order two meals because that was too many calories. 
 

I don’t have a problem with a certain level of federal regulations on school food. The federal government provides the good at next to nothing. But, The more you try to Luxor manage a program like that from Washington, the worse it is. 
 

Honestly, if they really want to help, somehow give local schools training on how to cook the food they get better. Our school has gone through staff where you can tell they don’t give a crap what it darts like. 

[ActualCornHusker]

19 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

So the solution is to replace those federal guidelines with local guidelines. 

 

The solution would be to tell the federal govt where they can stick it and do away with their guidelines. Local communities can decide for themselves.

 

28 minutes ago, NM11046 said:

I do think back to the ole' Nutritional Pyramid from my school days - a cornerstone.  Wasn't that a government initiative?

 

 

Fast forward to today, and we've basically figured out that the nutritional pyramid is almost upside down. Having grains and starches as the foundation of the pyramid and the largest portion of the diet is terrible misinformation that has done incredible harm.

[teachercd]

1 hour ago, funhusker said:

The "school lunch argument" is one of the stupidest things ever.  I've worked in schools before, during, and after Obama's program.  In my schools, there was no noticeable change EXCEPT that a salad bar was added where kids could get as many veggies/fruits as they wanted.

 

Kids could still bring whatever crap they wanted from home in a cold lunch.

Really?  I noticed a difference.  The lunches sucked once they tried to make them "healthy" but it really wasn't a big deal to me.

 

But yeah, kids still brought whatever they wanted from home, I have never noticed a difference with that.

[NM11046]

3 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

 

 

Fast forward to today, and we've basically figured out that the nutritional pyramid is almost upside down. Having grains and starches as the foundation of the pyramid and the largest portion of the diet is terrible misinformation that has done incredible harm.

Indeed - my point is that the government has been involved in our school lunches for a very long time.  And yes, we learn new things all that time that improve outcomes.

[teachercd]

19 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

There  was a big difference in our lunches after Obama’s regulations. I had three kids who were athletes in the school at the time. They actually took our salad bar away because the scaled dressings didn’t meet the standards.  My son wasn’t allowed to order two meals because that was too many calories. 
 

I don’t have a problem with a certain level of federal regulations on school food. The federal government provides the good at next to nothing. But, The more you try to Luxor manage a program like that from Washington, the worse it is. 
 

Honestly, if they really want to help, somehow give local schools training on how to cook the food they get better. Our school has gone through staff where you can tell they don’t give a crap what it darts like. 

What?  Really?

 

Yeah, that was not a federal thing...that was local school thing.