Connect with us


Let them Eat Cheerios and Peanut Butter and Jelly; We Do!



Some time ago my family outlawed the purchase of meals in our schools cafeteria. I always thought a bag lunch was superior to cafeteria food and I was ecstatic at the thought of decreasing my personal subsidy for public school free breakfast/lunch entitlement programs.  You see I consider them a breeding ground for the “income redistribution” mindset and, as they say, if you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem.
Don’t get me wrong I understand the importance of nutrition’s role in a student’s life I just feel that all parents even those in income challenged homes should be able to provide a modest breakfast and lunch to their kids especially when you consider the monstrous tax payer burden Americans shoulder by providing 31 million students families with a generous tax free entitlement income. I also believe that most American families should provide without subsidy, the food your children require. Isn’t that what food stamps are for? Also, I’m not willing to take a government handout and I won’t have my children enticed to incorporate liberal accommodations or tolerances in their lives. To be nice that breeds social moderates.
Contrary to popular belief every single meal served at every public school in America is subsidized by the federal government through the U.S.D.A breakfast and lunch programs. The subsidy amounts per meal differ based upon income levels and now have been expanded to cover snacks and after school program meals, but every public school student meal purchase is subsidized.
School food services (SFAs) receive a specific federal reimbursement rate for meals meeting U.S.D.A nutritional guidelines served for “free” (family income below 130% of poverty level) or at a “reduced price” (family income below 185% of poverty level) and for “paid meal” (meals purchased by students whose household incomes are above 185% poverty thresholds). This applies to breakfast, lunch and snacks at all public and non-profit private schools in America that meet U.S.D.A guidelines for nutrition. Any meal served by a school that doesn’t meet U.S.D.A. requirements is labeled a “competitive food” and its purchase receives no federal reimbursement.
Example: Schools providing a “free meal” receive a reimbursement rate of $2.68 per meal, “reduced price” reimbursement $2.28 per meal and a “paid meal” reimbursement of $0.25 per meal. At our school “paid meals” are $2.00 (breakfast or lunch). In other words lunch or breakfast would normally be $2.25 without the $0.25 federal subsidy.
Federal law regulates the amount (30 cents for breakfast, 40 cents for lunch) a school may charge for “reduced price” meals. School systems have no federal restrictions on pricing for “paid meals”. However, many in our government are calling for raising the price of a “paid meal” to accommodate discrepancies between a schools price for a “paid meal” and the federal reimbursement amount for “free meals”. Like you I was confused about that myself, but that’s our government and once again they want us to pay our fair share.
There is also another hidden ideology in this meal subsidy process deserving of your attention. If “paid meal” prices are too low for our government why should they have a $0.25 per meal subsidy? Because our government feels that students receiving free or reduced cost meals may be stigmatized or made fun of by kids who pay for lunch, so they decided to give everybody a subsidy and elevate this potential self-esteem issue. I am not kidding.
On average, Federal school meal reimbursements account for 50% of school food service revenues. Student meal payments for federally subsidized meals account for 25% of school food service revenues. “Competitive” foods (foods sold outside the federal school meals program) such as vending machines, or items that don’t meet U.S.D.A. guidelines account for 16% of food service revenue. State and local government contributions account for the remaining 9% of school food revenues. And we wonder why the federal government is so entrenched in our public schools?
In addition, the new nutritional standards implemented in September at the request of our First Lady have drastically increased school food service costs and lowered portion sizes. So the people who the government claims to be helping are getting less to eat and it’s causing fiscal problems at the local school level. Also Mrs. Obama’s demands to eliminate vending machines and other “competitive foods” are further reducing school food services revenues by cutting into the sales of “competitive foods” she doesn’t approve of. Apparently it’s also another stigmatization issue. Low income kids don’t have the money to purchase these items so they must go.
Every American who pays their own way realizes that entitlement spending (excluding social security and Medicare) is out of control. Recent reports on per household entitlement receipts paints a maddening picture for tax payers yet many never take the time to consider how we can effect change at the local level. Change at the local level often leads to change at the national level and the U.S.D.A school breakfast/lunch program can serve as an example.
As stupid and simple as it sounds if every American (over the 185% poverty level) sent their kids to school with a homemade lunch, instead participating in subsidizing another entitlement freebie, heads at the local level would begin to turn. Declining revenues for school lunch programs might get some attention from policy makers who no longer have the cash to pay for government subsidized free or discount lunches and your children wouldn’t be growing up thinking there is such a thing as a free lunch.
Like many of you I didn’t always get what I wanted for breakfast and lunch. When Carter was President I ate a lot of PB&J and leftovers slammed between two pieces of bread and we weren’t allowed to complain. Tough times call for cut backs and frugality. Just because you’re on the government dole doesn’t mean you’re entitled to more than self-sufficient middle class American’s can provide for their own families.

Don't forget to Like The Washington Sentinel on Facebook and Twitter, and visit our friends at The Republican Legion.

Become an insider!

Sign up for the free Washington Sentinel email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Washington and Lee University Defends Class Teaching How to Perform Marxist Overthrow of the U.S.A.

Washington and Lee University is defending its class teaching students how to perform a Marxist overthrow of the United States.



Washington and Lee University is defending its class teaching students how to perform a Marxist overthrow of the United States.

The university has been sponsoring its course, “How to Overthrow the Government,” but now the class is raising hackles.

In the course, students learn how to write communist manifestos, how to organize a resistance, and how to rise up to destroy the state.

The description of the class says: “This course places each student at the head of a popular revolutionary movement aiming to overthrow a sitting government and forge a better society.”

“How will you attain power? How will you communicate with the masses? How do you plan on improving the lives of the people? How will you deal with the past? From Frantz Fanon to Che Guevara to Mohandas Gandhi and others, we explore examples of revolutionary thought and action from across the Global South,” the course description adds.

The university defended the course saying the class is only a creative writing course meant to help students expand their writing capabilities.

But former House Speaker Newt Gingrich excoriated the school for the anti-American course.

“Washington and Lee University’s course on “how to overthrow the state” is one further sign of the insanity taking over higher education. The alumni should rise up and show how to overthrow a crazy college administration,” Gingrich said.

In another tweet, Gingrich said, “The progressive left’s influence over academia is real. According to the university’s website, a course at Washington and Lee University for the fall semester focuses on encouraging students to “overthrow a sitting government.”

Washington and Lee president Will Dudley attacked those complaining about the course saying the complaints “distorted, sensationalized, and turned into political fodder on blogs, television, and social media.”

“What better way to teach the power of writing — the idea that the pen is mightier than the sword — than to ask students to read and evaluate historical texts that aspired to move their original audiences to revolution?” the anti-American ignoramus insisted.

THIS is what our colleges are teaching our students.

THIS is what you parents are spending tens of thousands on.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at:

Continue Reading


Colorado School Suspends 12-Yr-Old for Picking Up Toy Gun During E-Learning Session

A Colorado grade school suspended a seventh-grade boy because he picked up a plastic toy gun in his home during a recent Internet class session/



A Colorado grade school suspended a seventh-grade boy because he picked up a plastic toy gun in his home during a recent Internet class session, reports say.

Worse, the school called the police on the little boy when a leftist teacher saw him fiddling with the toy gun, Buzzfeed reported.

Isaiah Elliott, a seventh-grade student at Grand Mountain School in Colorado Springs, Colorado, was taking part in his online art class on August 27 when he began goofing around with a neon green toy gun moving it across the screen before putting it back down.

The boy’s mother reported getting an email from the school saying that her son was “distracted” during the class work. Isaiah has ADHD — and the school is well aware of that fact.

But the leftist teacher also claimed that Isaiah was “waving a gun around” and that she reported the incident to the school’s vice principal.

The boy’s mother got a call from the vice principal who warned the woman that the police were on the way to her house of the “gun.”

“I had already explained to the teacher that it was a toy,” she said. “I told [the vice principal] that it was a toy. She admitted that she knew it was a toy, but Isaiah’s safety was of the utmost importance.”

The boy’s mother was flabbergasted that playing with a toy in his own home was suddenly a crime.

“How do I protect my son, what do I have him do [when] playing with a toy in the privacy of your own home is a threat?” she said.

Next, the morons at the school suspended the boy. For a toy. In his own home.

The school insisted that the punishment is appropriate because the child “displayed and waved a firearm facsimile during a virtual classroom.”

The school put out a statement on the suspension:

We understand there are many questions regarding an incident that took place during distance learning. There are also several inaccuracies being spread on social media. While we cannot get into details due to privacy laws, we want to clear up a few misconceptions. We never have or ever will condone any form of racism or discrimination. Safety will always be number one for our students and staff. We follow board policies and safety protocols consistently, whether we are in-person or distance learning. We utilize our School Resource Officers, who are trusted and trained professionals who work in our schools with our children, to ensure safety. The platforms we use for distance learning have the feature to record classes for educational purposes. During our first week of school, we were still becoming familiar with the platform. It is not our current practice to record classes at this time. Parents will be notified if that changes. We will continue to support all families in our school to make sure they feel safe, respected, and educated. Isaiah’s official notice of suspension, which Elliott provided to BuzzFeed News, said that he was guilty of “violation of district or building policies or procedures” and “behavior on or off school property which is detrimental to the welfare, safety, or morals of other pupils or school personnel.”

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at:

Continue Reading


Los Angeles Teacher Criticized for Wearing Anti-Police ‘Blue Lives Murder’ Shirt

United Teachers Los Angeles was hit with a backlash after one of the group’s board members was seen wearing a shirt accusing cops of being murderers.



United Teachers Los Angeles, the union that represents teachers in the area, was hit with a backlash after one of the group’s board members was seen wearing a shirt accusing cops of being murderers.

A photo of UTLA Secondary VP, Julie Van Winkle was posted Wednesday as the UTLA encouraged members to wear Black Lives Matter shirts to support a teacher who received death threats after wearing a shirt with the slogan “I Can’t Breathe” on it, according to CBS Los Angeles.

Some parents were very unhappy to see a member of the educational establishment wearing such a hateful shirt.

“My initial reaction was that I didn’t think I had read it right, but then I realized that it really did say, ‘Blue Lives Murder,'” said Niki Lopez, a mother of two LAUSD students, CBS reported.

Lopez, who is the daughter of an L.A. Police officer and is also married to a cop, found the shirt “hateful.”

“It’s so hateful, and it’s so negative about police officers in general,” Lopez said. “And just kind of making a blanket statement about them all being murderers.”

Lopez also wondered why the teachers union would even re-post the hate-filled photo.

“And I just don’t think it’s right,” Lopez said. “As an educator, I think that you need to think of all students and how you present yourself and how it affects all students, and I just don’t think that this was done in that case.”

Van Winkle later tried to walk back the photo of her shirt.

“I posted a picture of myself wearing a shirt with a message that does not reflect the views of UTLA. That post and my personal post have both been removed. I apologize for this and for distracting from the real work that needs to happen. We need to bring attention to what really matters — fighting for Black lives in our schools and in our communities,” she wrote in a statement.

The Los Angeles Police Protective League was also less than amused by the teacher’s shirt. “We’re taking the issue of improving policing seriously while some stand on the sidelines looking to stoke fires, create division,” the union said.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at:

Continue Reading


Texas School Apologizes for Assignment that Says Cops are Like the KKK and Slaveowners

A Texas school has apologized for a school assignment that put police officers in the same category as slaveowners and members of the KKK.



A Texas school has apologized for a school assignment that put police officers in the same category as slaveowners and members of the KKK, reports say.

The Wylie ISD, in Wylie, Texas, issued its apology after parents became incensed by the assignment, According to Fox 4.

An illustration that went with the assignment depicted white men through the ages kneeling on the necks of blacks with suceeding frames de[icting the black man as saying, “I can’t breathe.” The white men depicted are pirates, slaveowners, KKK members, western cowboy sheriffs, and finally a police officer clad in a blue uniform.

“It’s completely abhorrent. It’s disturbing and it never should have been included in any kind of assignment,” FOP National Vice President Joe Gamaldi told Fox 4.

“It’s not as if they put the image out and said, ‘We’re going to have a police officer come in and tell you how that’s not true.’ That was just the image they put out,” Gamaldi added. “At a time in our country where we are so desperate to bridge the gap with our community, where we need to rebuild trust, that teacher is preaching divisiveness.”

The FOP released an image of the illustration used along with the assignment:

The district knew it was wrong and canceled the assignment without making even a small attempt to justify it.

The school district hastened to add that the illustration was added by the teacher and is not an official part of the school’s curriculum.

The hateful illustration was reportedly part of online classwork for 8th graders at Cooper High School.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at:

Continue Reading


Leftist Teachers in Tennessee Don’t Want Parents Watching Kids Do E-Learning

Leftist teachers in Tennessee, are demanding parents stop monitoring what their kids are doing through their school e-learning programs.



Leftist teachers in Rutherford County, Tennessee, are demanding that parents stop monitoring what their kids are doing during their school e-learning programs.

Clearly these left-wing “teachers” unions don’t want parents to know the lies they are telling the children.

According to the Tennessee Star parents are being sent forms to fill out that include a pledge that they will not monitor what their kids are doing during the school’s online training sessions.

Any parent who signs that is a fool!

According to the paper:

“RCS strives to present these opportunities in a secure format that protects student privacy to the greatest extent possible, however because these meetings will occur virtually RCS is limited in its ability to fully control certain factors such as non-student observers that may be present in the home of a student participating in the virtual meeting,” according to the form.

“RCS strongly discourages non-student observation of online meetings due to the potential of confidential information about a student being revealed.”

The form demands that parents sign the thing and then warns them that “violation of this agreement may result in RCS removing my child from the virtual meeting.”

Think about what this means.

The school is telling parents that they have no right to know what their kids are learning in school and if parents try to find out, the school is threatening to cut off the kids’ education!

Are Tennesseans paying the salaries of these so-called educators to be threatened like this?

The school district claimed that the purpose of the ban on parental involvement in their children’s education was meant to “protect other kids” who “might” be seen on the e-learning broadcasts.

Bull. The real purpose is that these teachers do not want parents to find out the leftist lies their children are being pumped full of on a daily basis.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at:

Continue Reading


Iowa Professor Says Students Are Not Allowed to Disagree with Black Lives Matter, Radical Left

An Iowa State professor has told her students that they are not allowed to disagree with the radical left agenda of the Black Lives Matter domestic terror group.



An Iowa State professor has told her students that they are not allowed to disagree with the radical left agenda of the Black Lives Matter domestic terror group. And if they try to speak against these ideas in her class, she will kick them out of her program, she said.

ISU assistant professor Chloe Clark told her English 250 students that they will be “dismissed” from her course if they argue against “gay marriage, abortion, Black Lives Matter.”

The fascist prof posted the warning in her class syllabus:

GIANT WARNING: any instances of othering that you participate in intentionally (racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, sorophobia, transphobia, classism, mocking of mental health issues, body shaming, etc) in class are grounds for dismissal from the classroom. The same goes for any papers/projects: you cannot choose any topic that takes at its base that one side doesn’t deserve the same basic human rights as you do (ie: no arguments against gay marriage, abortion, Black Lives Matter, etc). I take this seriously.

In another section of the guide, she warned her snowflake students that she will be discussing books that “may contain violent or disturbing imagery” and offered to provide students with a “trigger warning” as she was getting ready to introduce the books.

“If, at any point, you would like a Trigger Warning before viewings/readings that may contain this imagery, please let me know and I’m happy to provide them!” she wrote.

The syllabus was highlighted by the conservative campus organization, Young Americans for Freedom, which demanded that the school answer to this fascist teacher’s proclamations.

Uncharacteristically, the school sided with the critics of the teacher’s intentions and ordered her to drop all the nonsense.

Iowa State issued a statement assuring students that they won’t be thrown out of class for disagreeing with a professor’s left-wing lunacy:

The syllabus statement as written was inconsistent with the university’s standards and its commitment to the First Amendment rights of students. After reviewing this issue with the faculty member, the syllabus has been corrected to ensure it is consistent with university policy. Moreover, the faculty member is being provided additional information regarding the First Amendment policies of the university.

Iowa State is firmly committed to protecting the First Amendment rights of its students, faculty, and staff. With respect to student expression in the classroom, including the completion of assignments, the university does not take disciplinary action against students based on the content or viewpoints expressed in their speech.

And, what exactly does abortion, Black Lives Matter, gay marriage, and other radical left-wing ideas have to to with “English,” anyway?

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at:

Continue Reading


Massachusetts Threatens to Take Kids Away from Parents Who Don’t Enforce E-Learning

The State of Massachusetts has told parents whose children don’t engage in e-learning taht the state will take their children away from them.



The State of Massachusetts has told parents who are too poor to afford new computers and Internet service that if their children don’t engage in e-learning, the state will take their children away from them.

This outrageous nonsense comes as anti-child, left-wing teachers unions refuse to go back to work like they should be doing causing the state to demand that kids stay home and engage in useless “e-learning” over the Internet.

Despite the state’s mandates, some parents in lower income brackets don’t have the money to buy expensive computers and pay for Internet services so that their kids can participate in the Internet-based schooling.

But the state says it doesn’t care and if kids are not seen signing onto the e-learning systems, state stormtroopers will pound down parent’s doors and take away their children.

According to the Boston Globe some parents have already received visits from the Department of Children and Family Services and have been warned that it is “child abuse” to refuse to get kids signed up for e-learning.

The paper highlights the case of Em Quiles, a woman who has to work a full-time job to afford family expenses and who has had to leave supervision of e-learning to her oldest child. But apparently, the state discovered the youngest kids in the family were not regularly signing onto the e-learning system.

Quiles said she told staff at Heard Street Discovery Academy in Worcester in the spring that her work schedule made it tough to assist with virtual schooling and she struggled to navigate the school’s online platforms. “They didn’t offer any help,” she said.

Then in June, Quiles was stunned to receive a call from the state’s Department of Children and Families. The school had accused Quiles of neglect, she was told, because the 7-year-old missed class and homework assignments.

“I couldn’t believe it,” she said.

This can all be laid at the feet of the anti-education, anti-child teachers unions and their Democrat cohorts who refuse to open the schools.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at:

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Become an insider

Best of the Month

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!
Send this to a friend