Meanderings

Bull Simons Quote

History teaches that when you become indifferent and lose the will to fight, someone who has the will to fight will take over.

Colonel Arthur "Bull" Simons
November 21, 1970

Legislating Waste...

Here is a brief email exchange that occurred between me and the MISD's Director of Food Service, Katie Watland, followed by my own commentary:

Hi Katie,

After going to Islandwood Environmental Learning Center for several years as a 5th grade teacher, I became much more aware of the amount of food waste that occurs during our lunches. This is particularly true during the primary lunch sessions where I see the smaller kids sometimes throwing away half of their meals. I was wondering if the food services team has recently discussed the notion of differentiating portion sizes for smaller kids so that they received enough food to be nutritious, but not so much that they would throw it away. For example, smaller pizza slices for smaller kids, fewer chicken nuggets, etc. Given our new online payment strategy, maybe they could be charged a bit less for their lunches - a real win for parents as well.

Thanks for the great job you guys do for the kids every day.

Best Regards,

Ellis Reyes

Katie's Response:

Hi-

Thank you for your concerns for potions with the primary lunch.  We are part of the National School Lunch Program and with that we are required to follow the guidelines setup by the USDA.  We are required to offer at least 2 oz of Meat/ Meat alternative, 3/4 cup of fruit/vegetable, 8 oz fluid milk, and a serving of bread.  We have to treat every student equally with portions and would not be able to charge two different prices for elementary.

While we can't change the portion sizes maybe somebody at  your school would like to take on composting like they do at Island Park Elementary. 

If I can be any further assitance, please let me know.

Thank  you,

Katie

++++++

 

That's right. One size fits all. A Kindergartner with a size 2 stomach gets the same amount of chow as the 5th grader with a size 12 stomach. So the size 2 dumps half of her food into the trash because she's full, and the size 12 goes back to class with a growling stomach. How is this a wise use of resources? Can we afford to be this wasteful? Wouldn't a little bit of flexibility be useful in this situation? Changing this ridiculous law is going to be my class' public service project for the year. We will begin by performing a statistical sampling of food waste over grade levels and lunch periods to gather data. We will then then use the Food Service's costs to calculate an average food waste cost per day and then extrapolate that number to a per year cost. Then we will compile a list of elected officials whose voices may be persuasive in changing the law and will start writing letters and sending emails.

We'll see where things go from there.

Yay, the War on Terror is Over!

Today the Washington Times reports today that the Obama administration has declared that the "War on Terrorism" is over and that the terms "jihadist", and "global war" are no longer to be used. These descriptors are now considered "simplistic" and "ideological" by the Administration which views itself as more 'nuanced' and 'practical'. An adminstration spokesman also lamented the "inflammatory rhetoric, hyperbole, and intellectual narrowness" that has, in the Adminstrations opinion, surrounded this issue.

What a load of elitist crap.

Referring to our ongoing operations as a Global War on Terror informs the jihadists that we will seek them out wherever they hide, and that we will kill them when we find them. Changing the vocabulary to something more 'nuanced' simply tells the terrorists that the Administration is being led by a bunch of sackless ivory tower asshats who lack the will to drop the hammer on them.

Mr. Obama, the way to stop terror is to kill the terrorists. It works every time.

The Beer Summit

So the conciliatory sit down with Cambridge, MA police officer Crowley, Henry Louis Gates, Jr., and President Obama is being organized. I'm sure that it is much more complicated for this to occur with an African American President than it would be at your house or mine. Why? Here are a few of the political considerations that I've come up with in the last few minutes:

I wonder if it would it be politically incorrect to serve an import? What message would that send to the U.S. beer industry? Should they serve a Boston-based beer like Sam Adams? Should they reach out to an African-American microbrewery somewhere? Should they serve something that is more stereotypically African-American, like Colt Malt Liquor, to show solidarity with da boyz in da hood? What if the families of one of the old-line U.S. brewers once owned slaves, what would the African-American community think then? Obama and Gates drinking slave beer, the horror!

Many things to consider before sipping a cold one with the Prez.

Open Letter to the President

Mr. President,

With all the respect due to your office, I think that you, personally, are a raving socialist and no friend to the United States of America. I think that you are exploiting the kindness of the American people to impose an agenda that is antithetical to the principles upon which this great republic was founded. You know well that we ache for those in need and do what we can to help, so you disguise your confiscatory and redistributionist programs in a veil of altruism, saying that we are assisting those who cannot help themselves. This is despicable.

Perhaps I would think more highly of you, and your ilk, if you were honest about who you are and what you are. If you ran for office under the banner of the American Socialist Party then I would have more respect for you because you wouldn't be lying to good-hearted, but naive, masses. If you ran as a Socialist, your agenda would be consistent with who you purport to be. I would oppose it as vigorously as I do now, but at least it wouldn't be positioned as something that it is not. As a Socialist your chummy relationships with Hugo Chavez and Raul Castro wouldn't be as offputting because we would expect them; birds of feather, etc. As a Socialist your apologies for Americas greatness would be more properly framed since the roots of our greatness is at odds with your predominant ideology.

Most importantly, as a Socialist you would be irreleveant because many more Americans would see you as you really are.

Kindest Regards

His words, my questions: Ellis vs. Obama

Obama said today that the driving force behind the federal deficit was skyrocketing health care costs.

Ellis' question: What about your uncontrolled spending Mr. President? It seems that your two attempts to stimulate the economy through massive spending have done more to expand the deficit than ten years of naturally occurring inflation in health care costs.

Obama said today that if we do not control the costs of Medicare and Medicaid that we will not be able to control the deficit.

Ellis' Question: Since this is already a government program, how will nationalizing the rest of the health care system help with controlling costs here?

Obama said today that his health care proposal will create a government run health care plan to compete with private insurers.

Ellis' Question: How do you "compete" with the government? That's like playing a game with the referee on the opposing team. They can simply regulate private insurers out of business and do the same with doctors who attempt to operate outside of the government program.

Obama said today that they have rough agreement that will keep the government out of health care decisions.

Ellis' Question: How is this possible if a government panel will decide which medical procedures are covered and which ones are not? This is the government being directly involved in health care decisions, isn't it?

XXXXX

Today's Thought

Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!

Patrick Henry
American Hero

North Korea Sentences Journalists to 12 Years

And my liberal friends mocked President Bush for referring to North Korea as a member of "the Axis of Evil". They're not looking to lovey-dovey now are they?

N. Korea Sentences U.S. Reporters to 12 Years - North Korea | Map | Government - FOXNews.com

Posted using ShareThis

The Most High Speaks on Nuclear Proliferation...

According to our President, the Most Honorable and Beneficent Barack Hussein Obama:

"I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons."

Really?

Isn't it the President's responsibility to pursue international policies that protect the U.S. and its allies? How does weakening the U.S. stand on nuclear proliferation achieve that end? Does the U.S. have a legitimate stake in which countries are allowed to develop nuclear capabilities? Absolutely. The expanded development of nuclear arms poses an existential threat to not only the United States, but also Israel, the U.K., and other democratic countries which are considered enemies of radical Islam.

Also, his Utopian Kumbayah vision of "a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons" is naive on its face. So if we turn our swords into plowshares so will the people who despise our nation and its freedoms? Right. Why don't we test that theory by eliminating the President's Secret Service detail? After all, if disarming leads to increased security then doesn't he have a responsibility to lead the way?

Deeply troubling.

 

Now We Know Where We Stand.....

In his Cairo speech of June 4, 2009 American President Barack Hussein Obama stated:

 "The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli                 settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop."

As a lifelong supporter of Israel, this unequivocal statement of U.S. policy against Israel is chilling. Obama's proclamation that the settlements are illegitimate tells me that future attacks on the settlements will not be condemned by the U.S. What is the effect of this statement? It tells the Palestinians that they can attack at will without fear of retribution from the U.S. or the international community. Essentially, President Obama is blaming future victims of terrorist attacks for their own demise because it is they who chose to live in 'illegitmate settlements'.

When this happens, I hope he has the strength of character to face the families of these victims and repeat these words to them face to face.