RoR: Forum

Post 0

Wednesday, March 12 - 5:46pm

Link

Edit

I just called the number and left a message for Catherine Sullivan-DeCarlo. On her voice mail, I identified myself as "Ed from Minnesota" and registered my "dismay" about this "socialist" policy, and my desire for it's "reevaluation".

Ed

Post 1

Wednesday, March 12 - 6:24pm

Link

Edit

The nutrition Nazis strike again. If they really want to address wellness, they should start with those awful school lunches we ate where mystery meat was the norm.

Jim

Post 2

Wednesday, March 12 - 8:36pm

Link

Edit

If I was the father I'd threaten this school with a lawsuit. Complete bullshit. Not surprising either to hear this from the socialist state of CT I live in.

Post 3

Wednesday, March 12 - 9:16pm

Link

Edit

Paleolithic humans earned their calories by picking their Skittles from widely scattered bushes. Running from bush to bush also burned off the artifical colors. Today's Skittles are a far cry from the gamy treats that may have been the impetus for the mesolithic revolution that brought M&Ms, Jolly Ranchers and Smarties to our diets. -- John H. Quivermain-Shortly The Empty Calorie Revolution: Filling Up on So-Called "Foods" with No Real Purpose.

Most school rules are stupid. If you are not a genetic martinet, then you cannot get a job in school administration. So, there's that. But you cannot tell me that little Markie Levin, the honors student, did not know that Skittles were against the rules.

Moreover, I support the ban. Candy is a drug. It makes kids hard to handle. They are better off without it.

I also suggest to J H-N that the public school lunches of our day may or may not be in this school's fare.

Finally, aside from the tax base problem, I fail to see where a ban on candy is "socialistic."
The ban was not on the buying and the selling of candy, but on candy per se.

Post 4

Wednesday, March 12 - 9:42pm

Link

Edit

No you do not support the ban. Stop lying. If you do it makes zero sense given everything you've said on this board in the past. You're just trying to flame bait. Either that or you are a schizophrenic. Now get lost.

(Edited by John Armaos on 3/12, 9:51pm)

Post 5

Thursday, March 13 - 3:48am

Link

Edit

Schools are just against the Capitalist system all together. Students can't buy or sell anything from each other on school property. My youngest daughter enjoyed making "friendship bracelets," but was prohibited from selling them to friends at school.

Stoopid.

When I was going to all kinds of student concerts and events when my kids were in high school, I was personally dismayed that I couldn't buy a can of soda from the vending machines during any of the events! The machines were all taped up, with signs saying "NOT IN USE!"

When I inquired about this, I was told by another parent that the district leadership all thought it was "unfair" that the school hosting an event could make extra money through vending sales, so they banned the sales altogether. As if hosting a student event doesn't cost the school extra money.

Just about the DUMBEST thing I ever heard of in my whole damn life! Staggeringly dumb. People should throw rocks during school board meetings.

Yes! to Skittles. No! to public education!

Post 6

Thursday, March 13 - 5:00am

Link

Edit

Yes! to Skittles. No! to public education!

Hear! Hear!!

Post 7

Thursday, March 13 - 5:59am

Link

Edit

Stories like this just reaffirm my decision to remain childfree.

Post 8

Thursday, March 13 - 6:42am

Link

Edit

John Armaos intoned: No you do not support the ban. Stop lying. If you do it makes zero sense given everything you've said on this board in the past. You're just trying to flame bait. Either that or you are a schizophrenic. Now get lost.

Well, John, it is not up to you to order me gone. Considering that Robert Kolker gets to post all over the place while someone actually rational (ok, rationalist) like Leibnitz remains imprisoned in Dissent shows a clear lack of standards here on that score anyway.

I also said that most school rules are stupid and I can see getting around a "No Candy" rule with all kinds of naturally organic "hits" like cocoa-covered coffee beans and dried papaya and -- my fave -- how about a foot of natural sugar cane stalk sap and all? So, OK, there's that.

But let me say this... About 40 years ago... I got a new group of friends when we moved to a high-rise apartment on Cleveland's "Gold Coast" in Lakewood. I have written here about the Atlas Shrugged view of the Lake and the ore boats and all that. Anyway, I went to a dance at this private girls school way out on the East Side so far, the signs were starting to read for Pennsylvania. The vending machines had fruit and milk. I said something to Claudia about it and she said that it gets expensive because the fruit doesn't always stay fresh over the weekend, but the school is committed to better snacks than candy. See, that's how rich people live. They don't pig out on candy, John. Their child brains don't fry. They don't misbehave with ADHD in their expensive schools and they get more out their education. It is one of the many, many factors in social stratification.

So, if you want your kids to be successful, imitate rich people and put apples and milk in the school vending machines.

(By the way, in 2002, I was a substitute teacher in Albuquerque. Their vending machines sold candy, which many kids ate instead of lunch. Lunch, itself, was a new situtation in many schools. Rather than federally subsidized mystery meat, they contracted it out ... to Burger King and Taco Bell... Ah! The profit motive! Can't go wrong with that, can you?)

Michael Sheridan was exonerated:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/13/skittles.suspension.ap/index.html
(Apparently, Ed's phone call did the trick... his or probably a million others...)

(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 3/13, 6:45am)

Post 9

Thursday, March 13 - 11:28am

Link

Edit

Hooray!! No impeachment!! Now the little V.P. can get back to the business of student government. (His purchase of the skittles did not involve an out of state wire transfer I suppose). As for Spitzer's "candy"... :)

Post 10

Thursday, March 13 - 11:55am

Link

Edit

Don't tell this to Michael Sheridan, but the reason that I led this public outcry (okay, I didn't really lead any public outcry -- but it just feels so cool to write stuff like that down), the reason I did what I did is to register my intense dismay with socialism in this country.

If a million Michael Sheridans were competing for my emergency assistance, then I'd tell them to take a long walk on a sugar-shortened attention span. Alright, alright -- I have something to confess ...

I EXPLOITED Michael Sheridan and his sorry case in order to get what I personally want done in my country! Ohh, the shame ... the personal anguish. I have double-crossed my brothers and, coerced by mine own sense of guilt, posted my own mug-shot on the telephone pole. What is to become of me -- in the court of public opinion? Narry a poor philosopher can tell.

As those little munchkin-like creature-villians in Halo3 say -- in their disturbingly-cute high-pitched voices -- as you are chasing them down with a highly-destructive Gravity Hammer and they are bobbling away as fast as their little legs can carry them: "What a world!"

:-)

Ed
[and this is BEFORE I've had my coffee]

Post 11

Thursday, March 13 - 1:26pm

Link

Edit

Report card on school snack food policies among the United States' largest school districts in 2004-2005: room for improvement. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2006 Jan 3;3:1.

" ... Most district policies had criteria for food and beverage content (74%) and prohibited the sale of soda in all schools (63%); fewer policies restricted portion size of foods (53%) or beverages (47%). Restrictions more often applied to vending machines (95%), cafeteria � la carte (79%), and student stores (79%) than fundraising activities (47%).

Most of the policies did not address more comprehensive approaches to the school nutrition environment, such as nutrition education (32%) or advertising to students (26%), nor did they include guidelines on physical education (11%). In addition, few policies addressed monitoring (32%) or consequences for non-compliance (11%). No policy restricted foods sold for after-school fundraising or required monitoring physical health indicators (e.g. BMI). ... "

Comments?

Ed

Post 12

Thursday, March 13 - 1:37pm

Link

Edit

Rand loved her chocolates, maybe that's why she was so hard to control...

Seriously, touch my candy and you die.

Post 13

Thursday, March 13 - 7:23pm

Link

Edit

Chocolate is a candy? thought it is a necessity....;-)

Post 14

Thursday, March 13 - 7:31pm

Link

Edit

It IS a necessity, it's been objectively proven...somewhere...

Post 15

Friday, March 14 - 4:36am

Link

Edit

"Hand over the chocolate and nobody gets hurt." --Mensa T-Shirt

"A life without chocolate is not worth living." --Luke Setzer

The "socialist" aspect of this story comes into play because, after all, most schools are government schools and thus are socialized education -- certainly the school at the center of this story qualifies as such.

A totally private system might still feature schools with restrictive food policies, but many others with no such policies.

Of course, home schooling would also become much more prevalent and parents much more involved in the education process.

Post 16

Friday, March 14 - 4:42am

Link

Edit

Chocolate is a necessity? By what standard or code?

"A life without chocolate is not worth living." --Luke Setzer

Bah, humbug! I'm allergic. :-)

Rand was a subjectivist! :-)

Post 17

Friday, March 14 - 10:56am

Link

Edit

Michael, I agree with you, candy IS a drug . . . and hard candy is a HARD drug. I know, because I had some last night -- not the hard kind, mind you (I'm not there yet). What I had were little Hershey bars, but they were enough to get my blood sugar high.

Normally, I don't indulge, but one of my neighbors was pushing it. At first I refused, but after the mint-chocolate chip ice cream (I think it was Weight Watchers, which I understand is still legal), my resolve weakened and I needed something stronger. So I tried the Hersheys with rice crispies and peanuts. WOW! I can't say I was hooked, but I feel could myself succumbing to a new and forbidden taste sensation.

I woke up this morning with a slight hangover, which I can only attribute to hypoglycemia. I could see that I needed another fix, so I turned to the gold coins they had given me. These weren't really gold coins though; they were chocolate candy disguised as gold, just in case someone had tipped off the narcs.

I hope the DEA doesn't allow my neighbors near the local high school. At the very least, there ought to be a "Candy-Free Zone." I can't imagine our kids trying this stuff. The resulting tooth decay and acne would destroy their social lives. Have you ever seen a candy addict? Their teeth are rotted and their complexions scarred and ruined. They're social rejects, who can never get a date to the senior prom.

I understand that inner-city gangs have now gotten into the business and are selling tainted Hersheys with twice the sugar, for which they're charging twice the price, not only addicting their customers but impoverishing them as well.

I agree with Michael, candy is a definitely dangerous drug that should not be sold to minors.

Instead it should be sold to seniors, whose drug coverage will pay for it.

Post 18

Friday, March 14 - 11:52am

Link

Edit

Bill D, post 17 was hilarious. Thanks.

Post 19

Friday, March 14 - 1:02pm

Link

Edit

Bill!

Here I am at the library trying to read your post 17 without making a scene from bursting out into laughter!

As Aussies say, good on you, mate (you're the goods)!

:-)

Ed