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


Nice... Using the President's children to prove a political point that should really not even be our MAIN concern right now.... Notice that the "White House expert" is a Republican. This is clearly NOT a party issue... This is just something that both sides can agree is WAY out of line.

Yeah, that's no good.

Originally Posted by Rob Henderson

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


Nice... Using the President's children to prove a political point that should really not even be our MAIN concern right now.... Notice that the "White House expert" is a Republican. This is clearly NOT a party issue... This is just something that both sides can agree is WAY out of line.

I am not sure what the point of the advertisement is...

"Jasmine Messiah, 8, says her Florida school doesn't offer vegan or vegetarian options for lunch. (Physicians Committee For Responsible Medicine)"

Umm it is a school not a restaurant, surely if there is any requirement for schools to provide food then all it should have to offer is a healthy option it shouldn't have to provide for every lifestyle option there is.

I guess the point of the advertisement is political as I am sure school kids never received "healthy options" under Bush, Clinton or any of the previous presidents for that matter so there is no point in naming Obama's kids other than for political mileage if it was reworded to say " "The President's kids get healthy school lunches. Why don't I?" then it would become a timeless advert devoid of political ambition.

Well, it went up while Obama is President hence the mentioning (though wouldn't be surprised if it was politically motivated as well).
Yeah and I also read the fine print about vegetarian and vegan options for lunch. That isn't exactly "not being provided healthy food." So not only did they use the President's kids (mentioned anyway) but they also didn't quite tell the truth either.