Trump Destroys Michelle O's Legacy; Makes School Lunches Great Again

Tyler Durden's picture

Michelle Obama made it her mission during her 8 years in the White House to eradicate all taste from school lunches.  Afterall, what kind of self-respecting liberal would she be if she allowed school districts and families all across the country to actually choose what food best suited their communities and children?

She even made inspiring videos like "Turnip For What!?", a clever play off Lil Jon's track (great role model for children, btw)...see what she did there?


Unfortunately, no amount of cutsie jingles or rap lyrics were sufficient to make the following school lunches appealing to young school kids...and we can't imagine why...

School Lunch


In fact, in the end, rather than eating a meal with slightly too much sodium, kids simply stopped eating lunch altogether.  As the Washington Times pointed out back in 2014, over 1 million students stopped eating school lunch in the 2012-2013 school year alone.  Meanwhile, schools all around the country reported they were buying food that just ended up getting thrown away or fed to pigs at local farms because no one would eat it.

The National School Lunch Program saw a sharp decline in participation once the healthy standards went into effect during the 2012-2013 school year. A total of 1,086,000 students stopped buying school lunch, after participation had increased steadily for nearly a decade.


The report found that 321 districts left the National School Lunch Program altogether, many of which cited the new standards as a factor.


The decline was “influenced by changes made to comply with the new lunch content and nutrition standards,” state and local officials said.

But, in one of his first actions as Agriculture Secretary, Sonny Perdue took steps today to reintroduce some common sense into school lunches noting that "If kids aren't eating the food, and it’s ending up in the trash, they aren't getting any nutrition – thus undermining the intent of the program." 

Per The Hill, in an interim final rule, aimed at giving schools more flexibility, Perdue and his department are postponing further sodium reductions for at least three years and allowing schools to serve non-whole grain rich products occasionally as well as 1 percent flavored milk.

The rule allows states to exempt schools in the 2017-2018 school year from having to replace all their grains with whole-grain rich products if they are having a hard time meeting the standard.


Sodium levels in school lunches now must average less than 1,230 milligrams in elementary schools; 1,360 mg in middle schools; and 1,420 mg in high school.


Before Perdue’s rule, schools were expected to reduce sodium even further to average less than 935 milligrams in elementary schools, 1035 milligrams in middle school lunches and 1,080 in high school lunches by the week by July 1, 2017.


Further reductions were set to take effect by July 1, 2022.

Unsurprisingly, the School Nutrition Association and kids everywhere praised Perdue's efforts to Make School Lunches Great Again.

The School Nutrition Association, which represents nutrition directors at schools across the country, was quick to praise Perdue. The group has been lobbying Congress for more flexibility in what the have called “overly prescriptive regulations.”


SNA claims less kids are buying lunch because they no longer like the food and schools are being forced to spend more money on lunches that largely end up in trash.


The former standards required all grains, including croutons and the breading on chicken patties, to be whole grain rich.


“School Nutrition Association is appreciative of Secretary Perdue's support of school meal programs in providing flexibility to prepare and serve healthy meals that are appealing to students,” the group’s CEO Patricia Montague said in a statement.


“School nutrition professionals are committed to the students they serve and will continue working with USDA and the Secretary to strengthen and protect school meal programs.”

Of course, just like when Mayor Bloomberg's Big Gulp ban got overturned, it's unclear how/if families will be able to cope with returning to a world where they actually have to make their own decisions regarding sodium intake.  

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
WTFRLY's picture

Let them eat GMO cake

Looney's picture


Michelle 0bama should be ground, made into 0bamaBurgers, and force-fed to the Clintons, Soros, Bezos, Musk, and Buffett.  ;-)


TeamDepends's picture

You want flies wif dat?

Juggernaut x2's picture

The Dindu Muffins are a big hit at Chicago South Side schools.

BigFatUglyBubble's picture

According to JAMA, CDC, and Harvard, the FDA RDA for sodium is dangerously low.  Get .gov out of nutrition, they have no fucking clue. 

knukles's picture

With a budget in the Trillions of dollars, they couldn't even get a simple thing like a school lunch right.

Manthong's picture

Oh, F me…

I can’t  leave this one alone.

Bestial Wookie food is not suitable for the general population.

tmosley's picture

Was just thinking--how amazing would it be for the home ec class to cook lunches for the students? Teach them how to make really good, nutricious food on a budget, AND make them far more interested in eating it than if they just had some crap slopped onto their plate.

ghengis86's picture

And learn a skill to boot. Run a kitchen. Prepare healthy food. Save money.

Save_America1st's picture

Abolish that psycho bullshit Common Core brain rot program next!

The_Juggernaut's picture

...and just like that, millions of kids who will be old enough to vote in 2020 think Trump is on their side.

Manthong's picture


You guys are right..

The problem is that scmucks running the schools are commies…

..and they do not care about effectiveness, they only care about their jobs and the system.

 ..the wife and I did not have kids for a reason.,





Fish Gone Bad's picture

The salt studies are stupid. There was a Cochrane Review where they looked at all the studies and they came up with... pretty much nothing.
Taylor RS, Ashton KE, Moxham T, Hooper L, Ebrahim S. Reduced dietary salt for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (Cochrane Review) Am J Hypertens. 2011;24:843–853. [PubMed]

Luc X. Ifer's picture

Eating habbits are a matter of brain training, u eat with pleasure what ur brain is trained to recognize as tasty.

My kids would find that lunch tasty and me too. If your brain is trained to find pleasure in garbage you'll enjoy

eating junk.

TheEndIsNear's picture

Lunch? The crap shown in the photo isn't enough to fill a hollow tooth. Have you ever eaten anything prepared in the French manner? If not, you have never eaten food.

Luc X. Ifer's picture

Dude, I'm a gourmet, I cook with preference French, Italian, Spanish, Japanese, Balkans, Mediteraneean, Coreean, some Chinese/Indian/Mexican also and own creations, for me eating is a creative & relaxing art not only a natural function. Yes, that food seems untasty to you because your brain is trained to recognize as tasty only junk.


overbet's picture

This is a good thinng. Sugary starchy foods that spike insulin have been proven to rejuvinate fatigued willpower reflexes and decision making skills. Two things required for peak mental performance. While they are by no means healthy, one meal a day like this isnt terrible and the benefit of improved brain function during their learning hours is worthwhile. Now get them doing some real cardio at recess and the negatives from that meal will be negated.

Anopheles's picture

They're liberals. 

Did you honestly expect logic and efficiency? 

Excursionist's picture

On this one point, I couldn't disagree more.  The picture in this blog post contains:  cheese, crackers, ham, cauliflower and some sort of indeterminate white substance, presumably potato salad.  This is basically the definition of a "square meal".

It's not supposed to be pretty.  It's not necessarily supposed to be very tasty.  It's supposed to get the job done, which this meal does.

If kids are turning it away and not eating, then they're not really hungry and don't need the meal.  Fine.  Fewer of my tax dollars frittered away.

And I'd rather they learn to eat square meals like this than the pizza, Fritto pie, etc. shit that sends them down the road of diabetes-by-age-40, when they begin sucking off of the government's teet because of health issues.

DownWithYogaPants's picture

I upvoted you but not without some caveats in my head.

Think about what this was really about.  Obama crony school food suppliers get the government money but then they have the cost of their output go down radically.  They then skim and kick back to Obama Inc. 

I don't think this was ever about nutrition.  I think it was about the skim.

JohnG's picture

Yes.  A lot of the schools in GA use Aramark as a contracted provider of lunches.  They don't even make them in the schools any more, just roll them in on carts.

Aramark also makes this:

Served in prisons.....


My wife is a teacher.  The food in her school was (is) shit, but has gotten a bit better since the wookie left.  Kids won't eat it, and then complain about being hungry.  Shit parents won't send food since it's all taxpayer provided at the free daycare that school is to them.

tmosley's picture

I understand the nutraloaf is actually used as a punishment.

krispkritter's picture

Sure it's not 'Nutria-loaf'?

undertow1141's picture

THe problem you miss entirely is your tax dollars are still getting wasted into a trash can. The schools still buy the food with 'your tax dollars' only to have them thrown away. Your ignorant answer saves you nothing, it just ensures 'your tax dollars' are wasted.

I'd prefer they liked and looked forward to school and the lunches there. Unlike how they have reacted to your prison food style meals.

essence's picture

Good point that you made.
Also consider that kids might not be hungry enough to eat that bland food, but soon after get hungry and have it affect their attention to learning for the rest of the day.

These points will probably be lost on the guy you responded to.
I would say he falls into that group, that train of thought, that government should be able to dictate how people should live their lives, even, in this case, down to what they eat. I could live with this if these folks were restricted to a city or county level,  I could just relocate to somewhere more sensible. It's when they inhabit the federal level that I can't stand for it. There's no end to their intrusion once they gain federal level power.

It probably never occurs to him that government has overstepped it's bounds.


Excursionist's picture

Like most things in life, it's about balance.  There's a role for federal government... in the right doses (see the tiny kerfuffle about states' rights circa 1865 for an example of the pendulum too far in the states' favor).

Schools don't want Uncle Sam dictating at the local level?  Great.  Don't take federal money.  You want federal money?  Fine.  But don't bitch about strings attached when spoiled / entitled kids whine about taste.

nmewn's picture

How perfectly Soviet of you.

SoDamnMad's picture

No, they dump Michelle's crap and stop at the fast food store next to the school. I saw CA schools near mini-malls where there were lines out the door of the fast food shops.  But then again I also saw a huge amount of good stuff like (Perdues) chicken paddies (pre-Michelles havoc) that got thrown out. Those suckers were good. No idea why the kids weren't eating those.

TheEndIsNear's picture

Square meal? Kids burn a lot of calories. That so called "meal" would be considered a starvation diet in a POW camp.

nmewn's picture

(Somewhere in the not so distant past, a bureaucrat rises from a long table and speaks)...

"Here's an idea. We will coerce the general population into sending their children to government indoctrination centers where they will be forced to learn a pledge of allegiance to a concept they can't understand at such an early age but they will still be able to recite the words from memory by the fourth grade. Then as time goes by, a stigma will be attached to the parents packing their childrens lunch for them. We can market it as a "nutritious hot lunch" subsidized by us, the benevolent state, who's only interest is in developing the childs mind, Completely innocuous. The parents of course don't need to be informed of any crony relationships with the vendors the state contracts with.

Looking out further into the future, the general population will become accustomed to this "feeding procedure" (in fact, demand it from us) and the food program can then be expanded to include breakfast, lunch and dinner. Still further along the timeline as the costs & dependency rises, we will begin to control those costs by weaning them away from beef proteins to beans, from butter to margarine, from eggs to soy, to something else perhaps slime." 

(The beady-eyed, bald headed bureau-rat rises at the end of the table)...

"I want an action plan on this on my desk by Monday morning so I can present this as a budgeted item. We're talking about our jobs here people and the creation of an entirely new department of government! That is all."

HenryKissingerChurchill's picture

we will begin to control those costs by weaning them away from beef proteins to beans, from butter to margarine, from eggs to soy, to something else perhaps slime."

excelent, let's also save the earth resources by making the human cattle eat insects... so that we can save the real meat for our master race elite overlords

maybe they will raise then the chocolate ration for us, the minions

Dizzy Malscience's picture

Nutrition is not all it is cut to be.


fajensen's picture

From the picure there must be about 3-4 time more calories in the packaging than eating the "food" will give.  

Anopheles's picture

Yep.   They should be getting rid of sugars and carbs, not sodium.  

hawaiian waverider's picture

Agreed.  Especially sugars.  As well, make the salt iodized as processed food doesn't use iodized salt and iodine is deficient in todays modern diet.

slightlyskeptical's picture

Exactly why salt has such a bad rep. - loaded with excess iodine. Give them unprocessed sea salt instead.

Ms No's picture

Deficiency in iodine can cause kids to be mental deficients along with numerous other problems.  The best way to give them iodine would be sea food first (assuming it's not radioactive by now), sea vegetable whole food supplements second, or nascent iodine third.  A lot of alt physician community think they are playing games with the iodide in salt and I bet they're right.  Iodide is likely not the best form and just prevents goiter.  As many people are deficient and yet have no goiter it makes you wonder.  I wouldn't trust these people with giving my kid anything.  They aren't responsible enough to handle a piece of gravel let alone a child.  They lie about everything and have forced municipal water into using flouride.  They know that shit is toxic and makes people docile retards.  It's not a glitch. 

Manthong's picture

Maybe it’s just me but I am craving a few Kg of Iodine 123 about now.

kiwidor's picture

compensate for the fluoride with iodine , magnesium, copper (in form of chlorophyll ) boron and potassium. 

HenryKissingerChurchill's picture

Deficiency in iodine can cause kids to be mental deficients along with numerous other problems.

so? isn't that the whole point of mandatory schooling?

Miffed Microbiologist's picture

True. I was hounded for years by my dr to drop my high salt intake even though my blood pressure was normal. He kept claiming it wasn't healthful despite this.

It's hard not to be cynical when there are so many conflicting recommendations what we should and should not eat. Generally, I just avoid anything made by Corporate Food and stay away from drs and I seem to be doing alright.


Ms No's picture

My doctor has me put Himalayan pink salt in my drinks in the summer.  I had some adrenal problems and was dehydrated a lot and had deficiencies.  It's a lot better for you than that toxic white table salt or the GMO sugar Gatorade drinks that people drink for salt and electrolytes, and you can always take a supplement that has real dietary iodine in it.  It has extra minerals in it too.  You can buy it at most stores now. 


DownWithYogaPants's picture

Plain old NaCl is not toxic.  Merely lacking in the extras.  Please don't help the SJW's erode the language.

Ms No's picture

Table salt is not plain old NaCl.  Also that folic acid that might be added isn't a plus either.  You don't want to take folic acid you want folate.  The iodine in there isn't what you want either.

Now compare that to the minerals in Himalyan salt.  It's a no brainer.  Your choice.

heresy101's picture

Not too thrilled about the radioactive elements!!!!!!!!!!!!

Radium Ra88<0.001 ppmFSK

Actinium Ac89<0.001 ppmFSK

Thorium Th90<0.001 ppmFSK

Protactinium Pa91<0.001 ppmFSK

Uranium U92<0.001 ppmFSK

Neptunium Np93<0.001 ppmFSK

Plutonium Pu94<0.001 ppmFSK

undertow1141's picture

LMFAO I suggest you look into ambient radioactivity. Your drywall in your house is more radioactive than these levels. The dust blowing in the air is more radioactive. If you are truely this obsessed I suggest seeking therapy.

Ms No's picture

Those quantities are nothing.  You have that in the mud pies you made as a kid.  If your worried about that then do Sea Salt.  That has more shit in it then pink salt now though.  Think about it, when we were uncivilzed we would eat salt deposits as we found them and crush it.  This is absolutely the natural thing to do and we are designed for it.  Processed and chemically cleaned salts are not found in the food chain.  Also with things like potassium (also has radioactive in ppm and is a radioactive element) and salts you have electrical charges.  We don't entirely understand how are body works electrically yet and we learn more all the time.  You are designed for natural salt deposits.  It maybe that we need a little bit of that.  Believe it or not but fluoride and arsenic are trace mineral that you need.  VERY SMALL TRACE ONLY though.   

OverTheHedge's picture

My only issue with Himalayan mountain salt is the idea of grinding up a mountain to ship it all around the world, to provide middle-class people a product that does the same job as insanely cheap "normal" salt, but is pink.

If you need some extra trace elements for medical reasons, fine. If you just need salt that is pink? Food colouring works just as well. I wonder how much of the pink salt really IS from Nepal?