When we last visited with the well-fed and rosy-cheeked Julie Gunlock, she was in high dudgeon about the cuisine at a DC soup kitchen that was serving fancy-pants gourmet items to the homeless instead of graham crackers and gruel. If you give a homeless man a bowl of pumpkin soup, she whined, he’ll never break the vicious cycle of poverty, alcoholism, drug abuse and disease and instead will simply spend the rest of his life supping on puff pastry, arugula, balsamic vinegar, baby artichokes and other delicacies normally reserved for people who have their own homes.
In most cases a performance like that would be hard to top. Most decent people with even a modicum of shame know that it’s not really good form to argue that some people simply deserve crappy food because they are, well, less fortunate. Noblesse oblige, and all that, keeps all but the most lunatic of wingnuts from straying down the path of trying to yank shit off of a hungry person’s dinner plate.
Of course, veteran SadlyNauts know that the preceding paragraph is a dead giveaway that Julie Gunlock has indeed managed to sink even lower in her culinary Darwinism.
What, your are probably wondering, could be worse than complaining that the food doled out in soup kitchens is too hoity-toity? Think children. Think hungry children. Think hungry poor children Think school breakfasts and lunches that are sometimes the only meals that children eat that don’t come in a snack food bag from 7-11. And, yes, Julie Plumplock thinks that this free lunch for 8-year-old freeloaders should be stopped so that their impoverished parents can whip up in their tiny kitchens some nutritional lunches for their kids to carry to school to eat instead of the government-subsidized food in the cafeteria.
Feeding a child is one of the most basic parental responsibilities, yet first lady Michelle Obama wishes to liberate parents from this fundamental role by urging them to rely on the public schools to feed their children.
Julie thinks, apparently, that if inner-city and rural mothers are liberated from the tyranny of the statist school cafeteria, they will be able to send their children to school with cold poached salmon (high in Omega-3s) and whole grain salads (say a tasty tabbouleh), both to be washed down with pomegranate and acai berry juice and all packed up in a fancy little lunch boxes.
In this op-ed in the Washington Post, the first lady pushes for congressional passage of the Child Nutrition Act, a bill that would not only increase funding for the already-wasteful and badly managed school-lunch program but relax eligibility requirements so that more children can be enrolled.
Oh my god! There go the socialists shoving more food down poor kids throats. Those throat-cramming socialists, by the way, include the noted Marxist Saxby Chambliss who, along with a number of other Lenin-worshiping Republicans, supports the bill
If this country is going to get serious about childhood obesity, we need to detangle food and the public schools and get back to better parenting — basic parenting. Government doesn’t do anything well, least of all cooking.
This is rich coming from Julie Gumlock, a name that refers to the visceral reaction of most people when they encounter one of her culinary delights. Ms. Gumlock has printed a number of recipes in her food column in The Examiner including one called — I shit you not — Cheese Platter Pasta. Here is a shorter version of Cheese Platter Pasta:
- Boil some kind of pasta. Take some of the boiling water from the pasta and pour it into a bowl of leftover cheese from a cheese platter until the cheese gets all gooey. Drain the pasta and pour the cheese-water-mess all over the pasta. Yum.
I have to think that even on the worst day in the most pathetic school cafeteria in the deepest backwoods of Georgia every single tray of food served up from that kitchen would be tastier and more nutritious than Ms. Gumlock’s Cheese Platter Pasta, which disqualifies Ms. Gumlock absolutely and forever from uttering another word about any school lunch program.