Anybody old enough to tell me if President Kennedy's physical fitness standards were also viewed as government sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong?
Every time a thread like this pops up it proves that what I have said about Democrats and Liberals in general is truer than ever and maybe getting worse.
Liberals repeat what they hear and believe what they are told because the are unable to think for themselves.
Liberals want ignorant even Anti-Americans like the Obamas telling them what to think, what to say, what to eat and how to go about living their daily lives because they are too confused by the choices given them under the Constitution's guaranteed freedoms they can't think for themselves, and even have to have the worst people in American History telling them how to raise their Children like good little Socialist/Marxists non thinking clones.
That doesn't give the government the right to usurp their authority, unless there is actual child abuse occurring.
Every time a thread like this pops up it proves that what I have said about Democrats and Liberals in general is truer than ever and maybe getting worse.
Liberals repeat what they hear and believe what they are told because the are unable to think for themselves.
Liberals want ignorant even Anti-Americans like the Obamas telling them what to think, what to say, what to eat and how to go about living their daily lives because they are too confused by the choices given them under the Constitution's guaranteed freedoms they can't think for themselves, and even have to have the worst people in American History telling them how to raise their Children like good little Socialist/Marxists non thinking clones.
I wonder what Sarah Palin would have said about Nancy Reagan's anti-drug campaign, or Barbara or Laura Bush's push to get kids to read more?
I mean, how dare these former Republican First Ladies try to tell us of the problems with our nation's youth and drugs or the literacy problem with our children particularly those in impovished communities.
:roll:
And there are more and more cases where obesity has been deemed to be child abuse.
It wouldn't be a problem if people didn't demand, rely and expect help for future ailments from the government. The statistics, however, show that the majority of those who are on welfare ando ther government assistance are also overweight or obese - thus turning their personal diet habits into a national issue.
Did Nancy go around taking drugs out of people's hands? Did the Bush's go around forcing kids to give up their video games and replace them with books?
I'm sure Palin would say they were good causes. Promoting something and trying to force your will down someone's throat, are two different things.
Cite please. Can you provide an example of this sentiment from MO?At least Palin's aware of the situation: parents are continually proving their selves incapable of properly parenting their children.
What actually is being proposed? Is Michelle Obama actually advocating taking peoples' children away from them?That doesn't give the government the right to usurp their authority, unless there is actual child abuse occurring.
I think the government has the vested interest in promoting and securing a environment to raise kids, but the actual duty falls upon the parent.I find it awkward when people say the government has no place in raising kids. The very thesis behind properly running a government would support the very opposite opinion. The government has a vested interest in raising kids to not be complete ****-ups like Bristol. I mean, at the very least - she can always depend on the money mommy gets. The majority of teen moms don't really have such a family safety net to fall on.
Shouldn't throw stones at glass houses, or does your opinion apply to all teenage mothers, this doesn't sit well with your leaning. It is the government who promotes teenage sex which creates what you call F ups. BTW Hatuey how can you hate some one you don't even know especially a kid.The government has a vested interest in raising kids to not be complete ****-ups like Bristol.
Can you provide an example of Michelle Obama advocating that the govt "take over and make decisions for us" in regards to what we eat or feed our children?I completely agree with this. Sarah Palin is right. She's also right that she would be criticized for it.
"And I know I'm going to be again criticized for bringing this up, but instead of a government thinking that they need to take over and make decisions for us according to some politician or politician's wife priorities, just leave us alone, get off our back and allow us as individuals to exercise our own God-given rights to make our own decisions and then our country gets back on the right track"
Every time a thread like this pops up it proves that what I have said about Democrats and Liberals in general is truer than ever and maybe getting worse.
Liberals repeat what they hear and believe what they are told because the are unable to think for themselves.
Liberals want ignorant even Anti-Americans like the Obamas telling them what to think, what to say, what to eat and how to go about living their daily lives because they are too confused by the choices given them under the Constitution's guaranteed freedoms they can't think for themselves, and even have to have the worst people in American History telling them how to raise their Children like good little Socialist/Marxists non thinking clones.
how is she going to "make" us do that? Will there be criminal penalties? Civil penalties? Will she give us the stink eye? How will she enforce her draconian will?No, what she is doing is trying to make us eat what she wants us to eat and with our tax dollars.
Michelle Obama has been taking food out of people's hands? Or no? Does you analogy follow if MO hasn't done so?Did Nancy go around taking drugs out of people's hands?
Has Michelle Obama forced kis to do anything? What means did she use to "force" them?Did the Bush's go around forcing kids to give up their video games and replace them with books?
In what manner has MO tried to force her will down my throat?Promoting something and trying to force your will down someone's throat, are two different things.
Don't you think there are larger drains on our welfare system and government assistance than obesity? You know, things that could actually be solved by government intervention that didn't involve taking away freedom and liberty from American citizens?
This crusade on obesity has nothing to do with the cost to society.
It's about control.
It also will not make people thin unless you plan to lock them up and monitor everything they eat.
Education is fine, but regulation and more spending? No way.
No, what she is doing is trying to make us eat what she wants us to eat and with our tax dollars.
Aunt Spiker said:At least Palin's aware of the situation: parents are continually proving their selves incapable of properly parenting their children.
I completely agree with this. Sarah Palin is right. She's also right that she would be criticized for it.
"And I know I'm going to be again criticized for bringing this up, but instead of a government thinking that they need to take over and make decisions for us according to some politician or politician's wife priorities, just leave us alone, get off our back and allow us as individuals to exercise our own God-given rights to make our own decisions and then our country gets back on the right track"
Prob'ly not, but it simply MUST be true. Otherwise, why would Palin say it?Since the question got ignored before, I will ask again: Can some one show where the Let's Move Campaign is taking anything over or making decisions for anyone?
What actually is being proposed? Is Michelle Obama actually advocating taking peoples' children away from them?
More intrusion, more regulations, more federal funding we can't afford.
Here's just a small taste of her huge agenda.
Mrs. Obama has already been talking about some of the 70 recommendations, such as having pediatricians measure children's Body Mass Index in order to track healthy weight. Others include:
- "Asking the federal government to revisit rules on television advertising aimed at kids "if voluntary efforts to limit the marketing of less healthy foods and beverages to children do not yield substantial results."
- "Federally funded and private insurance plans should cover services necessary to prevent, assess, and provide care to overweight and obese children."
Entertainment and technology companies should continue to develop new approaches for using technology to engage children in physical activity."
But the proposals, issued by a task force led by White House Domestic Policy Adviser Melody Barnes, stays away from any firm recommendations on controversial matters pending in Congress, state legislatures and city councils, such as taxes on junk foods and sodas. Instead, there is a recommendation to "analyze the effect of state and local sales taxes on less healthy, energy-dense foods."
Just as breastfeeding can reduce a child's chances of obesity later, reducing sugar in children's diets can also make a difference, the report notes. "Children today consume a substantial amount of added sugars through a whole range of products. . . . Targets for reducing added sugar will then need to be established that track the overall goal of driving obesity rates down to 5% by 2030."
Michelle Obama Unveils Anti-Childhood Obesity Action Plan