Vote Out Obama's Food Police

Published 2:28 pm Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Editor, The Herald:

A very strange and alarming thing occurred last week. If you get your national news from one of the so-called “mainstream media”, you probably weren't aware of it at all.

In an elementary school in Georgia, it was time for the kindergartners to have their lunch. As one young girl was on her way to the lunchroom, carrying the lunch that her mother had packed for her that morning, she was stopped by a “food inspector” from the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, who examined her lunch and determined that it was not “nutritionally sufficient”, and ordered the little girl to get in the line for the school-provided lunch. Being only five years old, the child did as she was told. The child gave up her home-prepared lunch, consisting of a tuna sandwich and a banana for a plate of deep-fried chicken nuggets.

Email newsletter signup

A curious person might ask, ” what was a federal employee doing in that school lunchroom, and who gave them the authority to force that child to give up her mom-prepared lunch?” The answer is simple. The Barack Hussein Obama nanny-government has presumed to step between parents and children because, in their minds, they know better than we do how to care for our most precious possessions – our children.

Another question one might ask is, “If there is one of these persons performing this asinine and offensive duty in rural Georgia, how many more of them has the Obama-nation hired?”

When our most hapless president to date, Jimmy Carter, created the Dept. of Education as a payback to the teachers' unions support in his election, he allowed the federal government into each and every classroom in our country. Since that time, what have the more than 5,000 employees done to improve education? No child left behind? SOLs? For that matter, how did the Dept. of Health and Human Services, with its' bloated staff of over 65,000 become the food police? The answer, again, is simple. Mrs. Obama, the unelected policy-maker, has decided that she knows how and what our children should eat, regardless of the example she sets. Like her husband, she is convinced that the answer to every problem is more government.

Two hundred and thirty-six years ago, our ancestors fought a bloody revolution to free themselves from a government that allowed them very few civil rights, and taxed them into continual poverty. Since that time, increment by tiny increment, we have allowed our national government to slowly, but surely, approach that same sort of oppression. If we are ever to regain the balance that restricts the federal government to those activities that it does best (i.e., national defense), we must do it in this next election cycle. We can do it by rejecting Mr. Obama and all of his like-minded co-conspirators in congress. It is time to do more than hope for a change.

John Jamieson