• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Permission slips for school cookies

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
The West Virginia Legislature continues to be a marvel of bureaucratic bullying. Lawmakers plan to make possession of Sudafed without a prescription a felony worth up to 10 years in prison. Now Democratic Delegate Ralph Rodighiero of Logan County wants to regulate Christmas cookies at school — along with Halloween candy and peeps at Easter.

Delegate Rodighiero introduced House Bill 2191 without co-sponsors. It would restrict “parents or the school to serve sweets during the holidays if the school receives parental or guardian consent.”

Written consent.

The equivalent of a prescription.

How generous.

You used to need permission slips only for a field trip. Now you need them to eat a candy cane at school. It really has come to this.

Efforts in other states to ban treats at school parties in the name of nutrition are under way. There was this nonsense in Massachusetts last December as reported by CBS:

WESTFORD (CBS) – Westford school officials are getting tough on classroom holiday parties. They’re banning sugary snacks and sweetened beverages from the celebrations this year. Students are being told to leave the Christmas cookies, cakes, candy bars, and soda at home and to bring fruits, unsweetened juices, popcorn and raisins instead. Superintendent Everett Olsen says the ban on holiday sweets has nothing to do with being politically correct, rather, his motive is simply promoting a healthy lifestyle.

“We aren’t trying to take the Christmas out of Christmas. We’re not trying to take the enjoyment out of children’s lives. We’re just trying to act responsible,” he told WBZ NewsRadio 1030’s Mike Macklin.

That is just one example of the power-tripping by school officials in the name of nutrition.

But if this nonsense passes, West Virginia would be the first state to make restrictions on candy canes a law.

Here is Delegate Rodighiero’s bill:

A BILL to amend the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, by adding thereto a new section, designated §18-2-6b, relating to allowing parents or the school to serve sweets during the holidays if the school receives parental or guardian consent.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:

That the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, be amended by adding thereto a new section, designated §18-2-6b, to read as follows:

ARTICLE 2. STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION.

§18-2-6b. Sale of sweets during holidays only; parental consent.

Parents or the school may serve sweets during the holidays, including but not limited to, cakes, pies, chips, candy or other types of sweets: Provided, That the school sends permission slips to the parent or guardian a week in advance and receives parental or guardian consent from one parent or guardian prior to serving the sweets. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit or limit sale or distribution of any food item through fund-raising activities of students, teachers or educational groups when the items are intended for sale off the school grounds.

NOTE: The purpose of this bill is to allow parents or the school to serve sweets during the holidays if the school receives parental or guardian consent.

This section is new; therefore, it has been completely underscored.

The bill has no name. I am open to suggestions from readers.

It also has no co-sponsors, which gives me some hope for the sanity of this state. The proposal carries no penalty if a child eats an unauthorized treat. How about 2 to 10 years, like the proposed penalty for possession of Sudafed without a prescription?

I tease. Please, don’t take that as a suggestion.
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/51199

Big Brother strikes again
 

TSR

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
2,115
Reaction score
0
Larrry said:
The West Virginia Legislature continues to be a marvel of bureaucratic bullying. Lawmakers plan to make possession of Sudafed without a prescription a felony worth up to 10 years in prison. Now Democratic Delegate Ralph Rodighiero of Logan County wants to regulate Christmas cookies at school — along with Halloween candy and peeps at Easter.

Delegate Rodighiero introduced House Bill 2191 without co-sponsors. It would restrict “parents or the school to serve sweets during the holidays if the school receives parental or guardian consent.”

Written consent.

The equivalent of a prescription.

How generous.

You used to need permission slips only for a field trip. Now you need them to eat a candy cane at school. It really has come to this.

Efforts in other states to ban treats at school parties in the name of nutrition are under way. There was this nonsense in Massachusetts last December as reported by CBS:

WESTFORD (CBS) – Westford school officials are getting tough on classroom holiday parties. They’re banning sugary snacks and sweetened beverages from the celebrations this year. Students are being told to leave the Christmas cookies, cakes, candy bars, and soda at home and to bring fruits, unsweetened juices, popcorn and raisins instead. Superintendent Everett Olsen says the ban on holiday sweets has nothing to do with being politically correct, rather, his motive is simply promoting a healthy lifestyle.

“We aren’t trying to take the Christmas out of Christmas. We’re not trying to take the enjoyment out of children’s lives. We’re just trying to act responsible,” he told WBZ NewsRadio 1030’s Mike Macklin.

That is just one example of the power-tripping by school officials in the name of nutrition.

But if this nonsense passes, West Virginia would be the first state to make restrictions on candy canes a law.

Here is Delegate Rodighiero’s bill:

A BILL to amend the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, by adding thereto a new section, designated §18-2-6b, relating to allowing parents or the school to serve sweets during the holidays if the school receives parental or guardian consent.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:

That the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, be amended by adding thereto a new section, designated §18-2-6b, to read as follows:

ARTICLE 2. STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION.

§18-2-6b. Sale of sweets during holidays only; parental consent.

Parents or the school may serve sweets during the holidays, including but not limited to, cakes, pies, chips, candy or other types of sweets: Provided, That the school sends permission slips to the parent or guardian a week in advance and receives parental or guardian consent from one parent or guardian prior to serving the sweets. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit or limit sale or distribution of any food item through fund-raising activities of students, teachers or educational groups when the items are intended for sale off the school grounds.

NOTE: The purpose of this bill is to allow parents or the school to serve sweets during the holidays if the school receives parental or guardian consent.

This section is new; therefore, it has been completely underscored.

The bill has no name. I am open to suggestions from readers.

It also has no co-sponsors, which gives me some hope for the sanity of this state. The proposal carries no penalty if a child eats an unauthorized treat. How about 2 to 10 years, like the proposed penalty for possession of Sudafed without a prescription?

I tease. Please, don’t take that as a suggestion.
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/51199

Big Brother strikes again

With respect to the sweets in school,do you know what probably caused this? One or more parents wanting to exert their authority and the school board trying to appease them.JMHO
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
TSR said:
Larrry said:
The West Virginia Legislature continues to be a marvel of bureaucratic bullying. Lawmakers plan to make possession of Sudafed without a prescription a felony worth up to 10 years in prison. Now Democratic Delegate Ralph Rodighiero of Logan County wants to regulate Christmas cookies at school — along with Halloween candy and peeps at Easter.

Delegate Rodighiero introduced House Bill 2191 without co-sponsors. It would restrict “parents or the school to serve sweets during the holidays if the school receives parental or guardian consent.”

Written consent.

The equivalent of a prescription.

How generous.

You used to need permission slips only for a field trip. Now you need them to eat a candy cane at school. It really has come to this.

Efforts in other states to ban treats at school parties in the name of nutrition are under way. There was this nonsense in Massachusetts last December as reported by CBS:

WESTFORD (CBS) – Westford school officials are getting tough on classroom holiday parties. They’re banning sugary snacks and sweetened beverages from the celebrations this year. Students are being told to leave the Christmas cookies, cakes, candy bars, and soda at home and to bring fruits, unsweetened juices, popcorn and raisins instead. Superintendent Everett Olsen says the ban on holiday sweets has nothing to do with being politically correct, rather, his motive is simply promoting a healthy lifestyle.

“We aren’t trying to take the Christmas out of Christmas. We’re not trying to take the enjoyment out of children’s lives. We’re just trying to act responsible,” he told WBZ NewsRadio 1030’s Mike Macklin.

That is just one example of the power-tripping by school officials in the name of nutrition.

But if this nonsense passes, West Virginia would be the first state to make restrictions on candy canes a law.

Here is Delegate Rodighiero’s bill:

A BILL to amend the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, by adding thereto a new section, designated §18-2-6b, relating to allowing parents or the school to serve sweets during the holidays if the school receives parental or guardian consent.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:

That the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, be amended by adding thereto a new section, designated §18-2-6b, to read as follows:

ARTICLE 2. STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION.

§18-2-6b. Sale of sweets during holidays only; parental consent.

Parents or the school may serve sweets during the holidays, including but not limited to, cakes, pies, chips, candy or other types of sweets: Provided, That the school sends permission slips to the parent or guardian a week in advance and receives parental or guardian consent from one parent or guardian prior to serving the sweets. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit or limit sale or distribution of any food item through fund-raising activities of students, teachers or educational groups when the items are intended for sale off the school grounds.

NOTE: The purpose of this bill is to allow parents or the school to serve sweets during the holidays if the school receives parental or guardian consent.

This section is new; therefore, it has been completely underscored.

The bill has no name. I am open to suggestions from readers.

It also has no co-sponsors, which gives me some hope for the sanity of this state. The proposal carries no penalty if a child eats an unauthorized treat. How about 2 to 10 years, like the proposed penalty for possession of Sudafed without a prescription?

I tease. Please, don’t take that as a suggestion.
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/51199

Big Brother strikes again

With respect to the sweets in school,do you know what probably caused this? One or more parents wanting to exert their authority and the school board trying to appease them.JMHO

I agree, it is your opinion
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
11 people possibly affected by consuming meth-laced coffee

Posted: Feb 9, 2012 11:05 AM by Angela Douglas (KTVQ Billings)
Updated: Feb 9, 2012 9:24 PM


BILLINGS- A Billings man is behind bars after allegedly spiking a coffeepot with methamphetamine at a local tax prep business.

Billings Police Lieutenant Kevin Iffland says they believe eleven people were affected by the incident at Laser 1040 on Grand Avenue.


Seven employees and four customers experienced minor symptoms of methamphetamine.

Police have encouraged everyone involved to get tested and a sample of the coffee has been sent to the state crime lab, but results will take a few weeks.

Craig Benedict, 34, is the only suspect in the case and he is facing a felony charge of distribution of dangerous drugs and a misdemeanor of partner, family member assault.

The family assault charge stems from the fact that Benedict is related to the owner of the business. But police believe Benedict was a disgruntled employee who had been let go.


Maybe a little meth in the kids koolaid- or mary jane in the cookies Little Johnny brings to class will spur learning :wink: :lol:
 

TSR

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
2,115
Reaction score
0
Oldtimer said:
11 people possibly affected by consuming meth-laced coffee

Posted: Feb 9, 2012 11:05 AM by Angela Douglas (KTVQ Billings)
Updated: Feb 9, 2012 9:24 PM


BILLINGS- A Billings man is behind bars after allegedly spiking a coffeepot with methamphetamine at a local tax prep business.

Billings Police Lieutenant Kevin Iffland says they believe eleven people were affected by the incident at Laser 1040 on Grand Avenue.


Seven employees and four customers experienced minor symptoms of methamphetamine.

Police have encouraged everyone involved to get tested and a sample of the coffee has been sent to the state crime lab, but results will take a few weeks.

Craig Benedict, 34, is the only suspect in the case and he is facing a felony charge of distribution of dangerous drugs and a misdemeanor of partner, family member assault.

The family assault charge stems from the fact that Benedict is related to the owner of the business. But police believe Benedict was a disgruntled employee who had been let go.


Maybe a little meth in the kids koolaid- or mary jane in the cookies Little Johnny brings to class will spur learning :wink: :lol:


Yep eventually things like this will lead to no party's in school or party's in alternate settings. Whats a holiday party in Elem. School without treats? Maybe the school cafeteria could step up and prepare extra treats for the parties. Kind of sad.
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
Oldtimer said:
11 people possibly affected by consuming meth-laced coffee

Posted: Feb 9, 2012 11:05 AM by Angela Douglas (KTVQ Billings)
Updated: Feb 9, 2012 9:24 PM


BILLINGS- A Billings man is behind bars after allegedly spiking a coffeepot with methamphetamine at a local tax prep business.

Billings Police Lieutenant Kevin Iffland says they believe eleven people were affected by the incident at Laser 1040 on Grand Avenue.


Seven employees and four customers experienced minor symptoms of methamphetamine.

Police have encouraged everyone involved to get tested and a sample of the coffee has been sent to the state crime lab, but results will take a few weeks.

Craig Benedict, 34, is the only suspect in the case and he is facing a felony charge of distribution of dangerous drugs and a misdemeanor of partner, family member assault.

The family assault charge stems from the fact that Benedict is related to the owner of the business. But police believe Benedict was a disgruntled employee who had been let go.


Maybe a little meth in the kids koolaid- or mary jane in the cookies Little Johnny brings to class will spur learning :wink: :lol:

This wasn't about all food.

Are you saying it is only possible to contaminate sweets and not fruits, unsweetened juices, popcorn and raisins

They’re banning sugary snacks and sweetened beverages from the celebrations this year. Students are being told to leave the Christmas cookies, cakes, candy bars, and soda at home and to bring fruits, unsweetened juices, popcorn and raisins instead

You failed again to defend this intrusion in peoples lives. Big Brother is still out to take care of you[/
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
it as crap like this that "encouraged" my wife and I to put our child in a private school..

it never ends..

as for parents' complaining, most of the time it was a the school board who read an article and wanted to make sure it wasn't going to hear complaints..

they would say.. "We should pass this rule before someone complains".. everyone would nod their head,, pass the stupid rule,.. and then... at the next meeting was packed with parents' complaining about the new stupid rule..
 

Latest posts

Top