The Pot, The Kettle, and the Vegan

[wmbwinn]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...03126.html?g=0

I find this article very amusing.

1)children are off limits unless you are Sarah Palin
2)"it is not successful if the White House hates you"?????
3)this Administration cannot tolerate even silly criticism like this...

I personally think that forcing a Vegan menu into public schools is ridiculous. But, the article causes me a great deal of amusement...

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by wmbwinn

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...03126.html?g=0

I find this article very amusing.

1)children are off limits unless you are Sarah Palin

really? did the palin children get used in a publicity campaign such as this? no? any campaign? no again?

you point lacks credibility.

2)"it is not successful if the White House hates you"?????

this org is attempting to get legislation passd, and it would be darn obvious that pissing off the white house would doom that attempt.

3)this Administration cannot tolerate even silly criticism like this...

the first family will not tolerate their kids being exploited like this, and I can't blame them.

I personally think that forcing a Vegan menu into public schools is ridiculous. But, the article causes me a great deal of amusement...

there should be appropriate choices for all students. I can't believe that the school lunchroom is void of vegetable dishes. if it is, than yes they should alter their menu and offer some.

that's just easy, just like altering the menu to get rid of fatty foods.

[wmbwinn]

Mavdog, are you embarassed at all by the ineptness and complete dishonesty of your post?

[Dirkadirkastan]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

really? did the palin children get used in a publicity campaign such as this? no? any campaign? no again?

you point lacks credibility.

I've seen you use this tactic before. Emphasize the minute differences between the two cases, and pretend that magically validates one and invalidates the other.

there should be appropriate choices for all students.

My religious beliefs forbid me from eating anything other than sushi and prime rib.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by Dirkadirkastan

I've seen you use this tactic before. Emphasize the minute differences between the two cases, and pretend that magically validates one and invalidates the other.

odd, it seems that a black/white, either/or is anything but "minute".

My religious beliefs forbid me from eating anything other than sushi and prime rib.

good, prepare it at home and bring it to school for lunch.

that's what kids who follow kashrut (kosher) law do.

[Dirkadirkastan]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

good, prepare it at home and bring it to school for lunch.

that's what kids who follow kashrut (kosher) law do.

I think you just talked yourself into a corner here.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by Dirkadirkastan

I think you just talked yourself into a corner here.

only if you demand to eat sushi and prime rib for lunch....

[Mavdog]

no, but I'm embarrassed for this site by the shallowness of your response.

[wmbwinn]

does anyone out here in Mavs Land think that Sarah Palin's children were not abused and used to slander the campaign effort of McCain/Palin???

does anyone besides Mavdog think that I need to waste my time going back over recent history regarding the Palin children???

[wmbwinn]

Special interest groups never worry about pissing off the guys/gals in charge. They seek to use various tactics to embarass or otherwise cause their agenda to be considered.

Making the powers that be mad is part of the game.

Did it not work well for the various special interest groups opposed to GW Bush to piss him off and attack him???

What is funny here is that Master Obama expects arse kissing and no protest. Community Organizers succeed by many tactics and one of them is serious protest. But, the Lead Community Organizer does not tolerate any ridicule

[wmbwinn]

How do you define the word "exploited" in your sentence that the children were exploited????

They were not attacked. They were not made to feel embarassed. They were not ridiculed.

The message was simple: Rich kids get one thing and poor kids get another.

Actually, the message is very interesting. It is similar to the "Senators" and "Representatives" getting the Federal Employee's Union Healthcare Plan by exempting themselves from taking the "Public Option" they are advertising that is so good for the rest of us....

Rich kids get one thing. Poor kids get another...

[wmbwinn]

And, would you really think it important to waste tax payers money to put a Vegan menu into public schools????

I want every reader in Mavs' Land who would have eaten a Vegan menu in grade school, middle school, or high school to post here that they would have eaten a Vegan menu at school if it had been offered....

No one in this advertising ploy said that the schools lacked vegetables. Actually, it is my memory in public school that every meal came with vegetables.

The issue is that these Vegan nuts think that the meals should have no meat and should have bean curd substitutes instead....

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by wmbwinn

does anyone out here in Mavs Land think that Sarah Palin's children were not abused and used to slander the campaign effort of McCain/Palin???

does anyone besides Mavdog think that I need to waste my time going back over recent history regarding the Palin children???

nice cop out. well done.

[Dirkadirkastan]

So where would you draw the line exactly? When does "there should be appropriate choices for all students" turn into "prepare it at home and bring it to school for lunch"?

[Mavdog]

if the school offers vegetables, they are providing choices for the vegetarians and vegans.

if they aren't offering vegetables, they should.

vegetables are an important part of good nutrition.

[wmbwinn]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

if the school offers vegetables, they are providing choices for the vegetarians and vegans.

if they aren't offering vegetables, they should.

vegetables are an important part of good nutrition.

Even in the stone ages when I was in school, vegetables were served with all meals. We didn't have breakfast at school back then. You ate breakfast at home. I don't think I ate a lot of vegetables for breakfast. But, anyway, the school meals always had vegetables...

so, the arguement you are making is without basis if you are saying that vegetables are missing in school lunches.

The article was not making the arguement you are making. the article was stating that a Vegan meal had to be an option. If you know what that means, then you understand that your arguement is not the same as the article (or the group's arguement in that silly ad). Vegans believe that meat should not be served. Thus, a Vegan meal would be all vegetables including those with protein as a substitute for meat.

That is entirely different and would constitute a significant increase in the bill for food at school. Vegan meat substitutes are not so cheap...

[wmbwinn]

Generally agree with the posts of Flacolaco and Chumdawg above.

Still don't see anyone out here screaming for Vegan meals...

And, no one has come forward either to say that the Palin children were treated better than the Obama children....

What is funny to me is that the group seeking Vegan meals has never had a better opportunity to possibly get what they want. Can you imagine that group going after Bush for Vegan meals in public schools???? That would be funny and Bush would offer to sell them some cattle....

So, the 'awful' criticizers of Master Obama are the same fringe groups that generally support Obama...

All very funny to me.

I posted this thread because the whole article was hilarious to me in the first place...

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by wmbwinn

Vegan meat substitutes are not so cheap...

Two things:

1) Cite? Are you certain they are prohibitively more expensive?

2) Weren't you just saying, upthread, that nobody would want the vegan stuff anyway? Let's see..."How much will it cost us to provide besically zero of these meals?"...

[wmbwinn]

Originally Posted by chumdawg

Two things:

1) Cite? Are you certain they are prohibitively more expensive?

2) Weren't you just saying, upthread, that nobody would want the vegan stuff anyway? Let's see..."How much will it cost us to provide besically zero of these meals?"...

Most Vegan meat substitutes are food products like snack bars or bean curd products or similar products. they are not cheap.

Now, Vegans divide themselves on what a Vegan exactly is. Some Vegans will eat eggs. Eggs are cheap.

The cost to feed zero Vegans is the cost of producing unnecessary legislation, hiring people to go check to see if the zero lunches were provided, etc. The cost is the administration of a stupid law. And, the cost is the lawsuit when that one Vegan found that the school did not have a meat substitute for lunch the day they wanted it...

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by wmbwinn

The cost to feed zero Vegans is the cost of producing unnecessary legislation, hiring people to go check to see if the zero lunches were provided, etc. The cost is the administration of a stupid law. And, the cost is the lawsuit when that one Vegan found that the school did not have a meat substitute for lunch the day they wanted it...

It doesn't need to be a law. (Why does everything have to be a law?) The association of school districts can simply decide that it is a good idea to offer vegetarian options to those who may wish to avail themselves.

For what it's worth, I myself am involved with several public school functions. When there is a meal to be served (sometimes catered out from a place like Jason's Deli, sometimes from a school cafeteria), there is almost always a vegetarian option.

In other words, it is evidently not that big a deal. So why the fuss over it? Offer up some vegetarian options and be done with it. That's what restaurants do, after all. This is really not that complicated.

Where it starts to get complicated is when folks take the stance that: [You can't tell us that we HAVE to offer up vegetarian stuff. Get your government out of our ass!]

The logical extrapolation of that line of reasoning is the scenario where schools serve manna every day...every...single...day. And you better damn like it.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by wmbwinn

Even in the stone ages when I was in school, vegetables were served with all meals. We didn't have breakfast at school back then. You ate breakfast at home. I don't think I ate a lot of vegetables for breakfast. But, anyway, the school meals always had vegetables...

so, the arguement you are making is without basis if you are saying that vegetables are missing in school lunches.

uh, no, the "arguement" (sic) that I'm putting forth is the schools should be providing healthy lunches, and vegetables are a basic item in healthy eating.

I actually posted above "I can't believe that the school lunchroom is void of vegetable dishes". you must have missed that.

The article was not making the arguement you are making. the article was stating that a Vegan meal had to be an option. If you know what that means, then you understand that your arguement is not the same as the article (or the group's arguement in that silly ad). Vegans believe that meat should not be served. Thus, a Vegan meal would be all vegetables including those with protein as a substitute for meat.

That is entirely different and would constitute a significant increase in the bill for food at school. Vegan meat substitutes are not so cheap...

odd, I know several vegans, and they don't try to prevent other people from using or consuming animal products, they just practice veganism themselves. they might go off on a rant every now and then, yet they don't campaign about "meat should not be served".

I don't believe you understand the difference between a vegan and a vegetarian......

[Dirkadirkastan]

I think we should just declare school cafeterias as unconstitutional and abolish them.

[Mavdog]

^ that certainly should be the case for the so called chicken fried steak they served. cruel and unusual punishment to be forced to eat 'em.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

^ that certainly should be the case for the so called chicken fried steak they served. cruel and unusual punishment to be forced to eat 'em.

Are you kidding me? To this day I have fond memories of the steak fingers they served at my school. With mashed potatoes and gravy...mmm. And the rolls...man, those rolls were good. You could buy extra ones for fifteen cents each. My friends and I got in the habit of doing that regularly, and also praising the lunch ladies for their oh-so-delicious rolls. It got to where they would see us coming and pull out a full tray of rolls fresh from the oven. We usually bought three or four. Damn, those were some fine lunches.

[Flacolaco]

My biggest problem with that article is that that idiot seems to be equating vegetarian meals with "healthy options."

I don't know about you guys, but when I was in school (public school) they always had peanut butter and jelly sandwiches if you wanted one...Even when I went to middle school in east Los Angeles.

And I'm not sure about this either:

"The direct comparison is: You have affluent children with access to healthy foods, and disadvantaged children have the same rights to the same kinds of healthy meals as affluent kids. And we are fighting for that fairness, so we felt that making that statement as directly as we could was important."

Do Obama's kids go to public school? I'm pretty sure they don't. Kids that go to public school in no way have the same "right" to the same food that parents pay for at private school. What a ridiculous thing to say.

[Flacolaco]

Second on the chicken fried steak, chum. Particularly here in the LISD. I have fond memories of it.

[Mavdog]

this was in the lubbock isd, and believe they did not use steak. not even sure if it was beef at all, at best some sort of processed beef by products...stuff was probably rejected from the hot dog bin...

[Dirkadirkastan]

It's good to see a political thread finally take a productive turn.

[Flacolaco]

I wonder what percentage of 8 year olds being raised vegan go off to school and get that first taste of a pepperoni pizza and then...

[DirkFTW]

[92bDad]

Has anyone ever pointed out that meat is nothing more than processed vegetables?

[92bDad]

Ever notice that Cows don't eat meat, but Lions do?

Things that make you go hmmmmmm.....

[FINtastic]

[wmbwinn]

As I noted, you need to look for B12 supplements or fortified food which is what you admitted by indicated that you prefer soy products fortified with B12.

You still overlook major points to focus on twisting the most minor points. You ignored the majority of my explanation.

You also have not addressed the main issue which was:

Obama is furious that the silly little special interest group pictured his daughters without maligning his daughters or him.

Even your weak objections support my assertion that there is hypocrisy at play. What infuriates Obama is minimal. What was done to Palin using her children for political purposes was much larger and more egregious.

Hence the title I chose using the reference to the Pot calling the Kettle black...

Why try to derail me by arguing the extent that Palin's children were used for political purposes? That has nothing to do with the point that Obama is furious over the Vegan ad while allowing/ignoring the more egregious violation of the "leave the kids out of it rule" of politics in the matter of Palin...

[mcsluggo]

Originally Posted by wmbwinn

As I noted, you need to look for B12 supplements or fortified food which is what you admitted by indicated that you prefer soy products fortified with B12.

You still overlook major points to focus on twisting the most minor points. You ignored the majority of my explanation.

You also have not addressed the main issue which was:

Obama is furious that the silly little special interest group pictured his daughters without maligning his daughters or him.

Even your weak objections support my assertion that there is hypocrisy at play. What infuriates Obama is minimal. What was done to Palin using her children for political purposes was much larger and more egregious.

Hence the title I chose using the reference to the Pot calling the Kettle black...

Why try to derail me by arguing the extent that Palin's children were used for political purposes? That has nothing to do with the point that Obama is furious over the Vegan ad while allowing/ignoring the more egregious violation of the "leave the kids out of it rule" of politics in the matter of Palin...

Vegans piss me off in general...

but your OTHER point seems to rest on the unstated assumption that it was THE OBAMAS that were being mean to the Palin children (so they have lost any right to be protective of their own children). I really see no connection from point A to point B....?

Let me ask you this.... Since I dislike candidate Palin, and some people were mean to the Palin children... does that mean that I have squandered my right to be mad when I think somebody is mean to my own children?

[wmbwinn]

Originally Posted by mcsluggo

Vegans piss me off in general...

but your OTHER point seems to rest on the unstated assumption that it was THE OBAMAS that were being mean to the Palin children (so they have lost any right to be protective of their own children). I really see no connection from point A to point B....?

Let me ask you this.... Since I dislike candidate Palin, and some people were mean to the Palin children... does that mean that I have squandered my right to be mad when I think somebody is mean to my own children?

The "unstated point" was never stated. It would have been tremendously stupid for Obama to directly target the greater Palin family including the children. So... his media friends did it for him. Convenient.

And, I did already explain that. Mavdog also intended (and still intends) to hold me to proving Obama himself maligned the children of Palin as a method to destroy Palin as a viable candidate.

Honestly, I don't understand the logic or meaning of your last paragraph above. I do not think you would squander your right to be mad at me if I disparaged your children.

However, similar to Chumdawg, you also above said that "some people were mean to the Palin children" which again is another agreement that the Palin children were targets of an overall strategy although I can't prove that Obama orchestrated it.

As I noted/questioned before (with no response), shall we take the Glenn Beck Show, the Rush Limbaugh program, the Andrew Wilkow program, the Church program, the Sean Hannity program, and other "Right Wing Nuts" and never draw any connection between them and the GOP at large?

The minions of the leader may not be proven to be tied to the leader but that does not mean they are not on the same team...

[wmbwinn]

I find it repugnant that you would continue to act like there was not a significant effort to destroy the Palin candidacy by attacking her family. I find it disturbing that you would ask for proof as if you really believe nothing happened. The fact that there is not an ad with a closing statement "I am Barack Obama and I approve this message" does not mean that there was not a serious broad persistent attack launched.

Here is one little link of a youtube. After it is over, look at the huge volume of other youtube entries from a broad range of sources that atttack various aspects of the Palin family.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEQdYdCfl60

[DirkFTW]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

underrated post

[Mavdog]

first of all, you interjected sarah palin and her children into the discussion in the very first post. your question "why" is pretty absurd, as you are the party that did it you are the one who can provide the answer.

the history of the presidency is that the president's children are "off limits". that was echoed by numerous historians in the article, from both sides of the aisle. obama is not seeking special nor different treatment than that which has been afforded other presidents, therefore no "hypocrisy" exists.

you've still not shown how palin's kids were used by her opponents in the campaign, while I've shown how obama's kids were used by his opponent.

so far it's the republicans who have been shown to exhibit hypocrisy....

[wmbwinn]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

first of all, you interjected sarah palin and her children into the discussion in the very first post. your question "why" is pretty absurd, as you are the party that did it you are the one who can provide the answer.

the history of the presidency is that the president's children are "off limits". that was echoed by numerous historians in the article, from both sides of the aisle. obama is not seeking special nor different treatment than that which has been afforded other presidents, therefore no "hypocrisy" exists.

you've still not shown how palin's kids were used by her opponents in the campaign, while I've shown how obama's kids were used by his opponent.

so far it's the republicans who have been shown to exhibit hypocrisy....

You truly are either tremendously weak in mental function or you are just a pathological liar who is enjoying this is in a sick way.

1)the "off limits" rule applies to the presidential candidates, not just the president.
2)I have shown several examples of how Palin's kids were used as political weapons
3)The Republicans were not at all involved in this pseudo attack (pseudo because no attack occurred) on Obama and his children. This attack came ironically from a typical tiny special interest group that flourishes in the Democrat Party.
Do you really think to imply that the Vegans are Republicans???????

So, which is it:
1)stupid?
2)pathological liar enjoying irritating me?

And, I will put it up to the larger group again:
If I am out of line here and if you think Mavdog has any sensible points, then let me know by posting in her defense.