The Wrath of Michelle O Strikes Again

[Si modo]

Slippery slope...It becomes my business, and your business, when these irresponsible eaters need health-care and can't afford it, among other things. Obviously it doesn't include all people that eat like that, but still...

No offense, but that sort of thinking is just too lame.

Let's have laws requiring daily exercise, too.

And, who cares if an individual gags when they have to eat a vegetable, force them - it's the law.

And, prohibit all forms of rock and mountain climbing - it's too ******* dangerous and someone might have to pay for their healthcare.

Bicycling is dangerous, too. Outlaw it.

Stop producing cars, and certainly don't allow anyone to drive those death traps.

Too many bathtub injuries per year - baths are now illegal.

And, ONLY a person certified by the government, of course, can slice breakfast bagels - too many folks cut themselves each year doing so.

Etc.

Who's going to pay for all the medical bills? The bigger coffins?

You Conservatives LOVE to cry about the poor taxpayer when it's about welfare and entitlement programs. But who exactly are you sticking with the bill for me and all my fellow fatties, exactly?

HYPOCRITE ALERT! HYPOCRITE ALERT!

Start writing those letters to get all those laws passed, don't waste your time posting. You have a lot of work to do.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Slippery slope...It becomes my business, and your business, when these irresponsible eaters need health-care and can't afford it, among other things. Obviously it doesn't include all people that eat like that, but still...

same with making babies the tax payers have to feed, house and clothe.

Yeah, it is.

I'm all for regulations prohibiting someone from having a child if you have no way of financially caring for it.

In a perfect world, I would rather see people just be responsible, but I know it can't be, and I have data to back it up.

nope.....libs say you can't regulate sex....

libs are ok with regulating your kitchen.....but NOT your bedroom*....



*until the one child only like China policy kicks in....

 

[bobcollum]

same with making babies the tax payers have to feed, house and clothe.

Yeah, it is.

I'm all for regulations prohibiting someone from having a child if you have no way of financially caring for it.

In a perfect world, I would rather see people just be responsible, but I know it can't be, and I have data to back it up.

nope.....libs say you can't regulate sex....

libs are ok with regulating your kitchen.....but NOT your bedroom*....



*until the one child only like China policy kicks in....

Was there a relevant point to this post?

Libs say this, libs do that....

 

[tjvh]

Slippery slope...It becomes my business, and your business, when these irresponsible eaters need health-care and can't afford it, among other things. Obviously it doesn't include all people that eat like that, but still...

No offense, but that sort of thinking is just too lame.

Let's have laws requiring daily exercise, too.

And, who cares if an individual gags when they have to eat a vegetable, force them - it's the law.

And, prohibit all forms of rock and mountain climbing - it's too ******* dangerous and someone might have to pay for their healthcare.

Bicycling is dangerous, too. Outlaw it.

Stop producing cars, and certainly don't allow anyone to drive those death traps.

Too many bathtub injuries per year - baths are now illegal.

And, ONLY a person certified by the government, of course, can slice breakfast bagels - too many folks cut themselves each year doing so.

Etc.

Who's going to pay for all the medical bills? The bigger coffins?

You Conservatives LOVE to cry about the poor taxpayer when it's about welfare and entitlement programs. But who exactly are you sticking with the bill for me and all my fellow fatties, exactly?

HYPOCRITE ALERT! HYPOCRITE ALERT!

You still haven't answered my question as to why we don't hear Liberal's wanting to put "limits" on Food Stamps? Since you're on the subject of Hypocrisy, and obesity.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Yeah, it is.

I'm all for regulations prohibiting someone from having a child if you have no way of financially caring for it.

In a perfect world, I would rather see people just be responsible, but I know it can't be, and I have data to back it up.

nope.....libs say you can't regulate sex....

libs are ok with regulating your kitchen.....but NOT your bedroom*....



*until the one child only like China policy kicks in....

Was there a relevant point to this post?

Libs say this, libs do that....

so are you a lib or do you just like to regulate other peoples' personal business.....?

 

[bobcollum]

it's none of yours or her business what Americans eat.. dumbass.

Slippery slope...It becomes my business, and your business, when these irresponsible eaters need health-care and can't afford it, among other things. Obviously it doesn't include all people that eat like that, but still...

No offense, but that sort of thinking is just too lame.

Let's have laws requiring daily exercise, too.

And, who cares if an individual gags when they have to eat a vegetable, force them - it's the law.

And, prohibit all forms of rock and mountain climbing - it's too ******* dangerous and someone might have to pay for their healthcare.

Bicycling is dangerous, too. Outlaw it.

Stop producing cars, and certainly don't allow anyone to drive those death traps.

Too many bathtub injuries per year - baths are now illegal.

And, ONLY a person certified by the government, of course, can slice breakfast bagels - too many folks cut themselves each year doing so.

Etc.

That's why it's slippery.

Lame, maybe, but in the end it's true with respect to that issue, others have to take on the cost of unrelated people and their reckless habits.

I don't care if people can responsibly care for themselves after they did something stupid, those people aren't the problem. It's when someone's problem becomes the problem of another that I take issue with. If you're reckless with a gun and you shoot yourself in the leg, I don't care, If you shoot someone else in the leg, my opinion greatly changes.

Your post in a way to an extent is similar to the anti-gay marriage crowd that worries it will lead to people getting married to animals or trees. I don't mean that out of disrespect, but to take it to the extreme of your perspective, why have any laws at all? People should know what's right and what's wrong.

 

[bobcollum]

nope.....libs say you can't regulate sex....

libs are ok with regulating your kitchen.....but NOT your bedroom*....



*until the one child only like China policy kicks in....

Was there a relevant point to this post?

Libs say this, libs do that....

so are you a lib or do you just like to regulate other peoples' personal business.....?

As I said, in an ideal world I wish people could just be responsible and use common sense, but we obviously don't have that kind of world. It can be statistically proven.

Is regulation the answer? Sometimes it is, and sometimes it doesn't do a damn thing.

I'm just always marveling at Conservatives that claim regulations are never needed, and people should be able to do whatever they want, because they don't need to be told what to do.

That may not be you, but don't pretend those people don't exist.

 

[signelect]

As much as I dislike Obama and his wifes policitics I suspect that this type of thing happens in all administration and has nothing to do with being liberal or conservative or black and white. My problem is that neither of them has any inkling of what this country is facing because they live the good life and way beyond their means.

 

[Si modo]

Slippery slope...It becomes my business, and your business, when these irresponsible eaters need health-care and can't afford it, among other things. Obviously it doesn't include all people that eat like that, but still...

No offense, but that sort of thinking is just too lame.

Let's have laws requiring daily exercise, too.

And, who cares if an individual gags when they have to eat a vegetable, force them - it's the law.

And, prohibit all forms of rock and mountain climbing - it's too ******* dangerous and someone might have to pay for their healthcare.

Bicycling is dangerous, too. Outlaw it.

Stop producing cars, and certainly don't allow anyone to drive those death traps.

Too many bathtub injuries per year - baths are now illegal.

And, ONLY a person certified by the government, of course, can slice breakfast bagels - too many folks cut themselves each year doing so.

Etc.

That's why it's slippery.

Lame, maybe, but in the end it's true with respect to that issue, others have to take on the cost of unrelated people and their reckless habits.

I don't care if people can responsibly care for themselves after they did something stupid, those people aren't the problem. It's when someone's problem becomes the problem of another that I take issue with. If you're reckless with a gun and you shoot yourself in the leg, I don't care, If you shoot someone else in the leg, my opinion greatly changes.

Your post in a way to an extent is similar to the anti-gay marriage crowd that worries it will lead to people getting married to animals or trees. I don't mean that out of disrespect, but to take it to the extreme of your perspective, why have any laws at all? People should know what's right and what's wrong.

Laws that are limited, and it's perfectly clear when they are, are good laws.

The slippery slope laws are not good laws, especially since we are a nation based on common law.

It's pretty simple and clear.

Reality is not some utopia that can be legislated and that reality includes folks who don't act the way you want them to act.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

No offense, but that sort of thinking is just too lame.

Let's have laws requiring daily exercise, too.

And, who cares if an individual gags when they have to eat a vegetable, force them - it's the law.

And, prohibit all forms of rock and mountain climbing - it's too ******* dangerous and someone might have to pay for their healthcare.

Bicycling is dangerous, too. Outlaw it.

Stop producing cars, and certainly don't allow anyone to drive those death traps.

Too many bathtub injuries per year - baths are now illegal.

And, ONLY a person certified by the government, of course, can slice breakfast bagels - too many folks cut themselves each year doing so.

Etc.

Who's going to pay for all the medical bills? The bigger coffins?

You Conservatives LOVE to cry about the poor taxpayer when it's about welfare and entitlement programs. But who exactly are you sticking with the bill for me and all my fellow fatties, exactly?

HYPOCRITE ALERT! HYPOCRITE ALERT!

You still haven't answered my question as to why we don't hear Liberal's wanting to put "limits" on Food Stamps? Since you're on the subject of Hypocrisy, and obesity.

What do you mean by limits? You mean what you can buy with it? There are limits, they're just not very good because the food still has to be cheap (read: processed) to make it affordable. But thanks for playing, Slapnuts.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Was there a relevant point to this post?

Libs say this, libs do that....

so are you a lib or do you just like to regulate other peoples' personal business.....?

As I said, in an ideal world I wish people could just be responsible and use common sense, but we obviously don't have that kind of world. It can be statistically proven.

Is regulation the answer? Sometimes it is, and sometimes it doesn't do a damn thing.

I'm just always marveling at Conservatives that claim regulations are never needed, and people should be able to do whatever they want, because they don't need to be told what to do.

That may not be you, but don't pretend those people don't exist.

i agree with you on the idea of personal responsibility.....

however i believe the only way to actually encourage it is to not provide all the government programs that support people who should provide for themselves....

 

[tjvh]

Who's going to pay for all the medical bills? The bigger coffins?

You Conservatives LOVE to cry about the poor taxpayer when it's about welfare and entitlement programs. But who exactly are you sticking with the bill for me and all my fellow fatties, exactly?

HYPOCRITE ALERT! HYPOCRITE ALERT!

You still haven't answered my question as to why we don't hear Liberal's wanting to put "limits" on Food Stamps? Since you're on the subject of Hypocrisy, and obesity.

What do you mean by limits? You mean what you can buy with it? There are limits, they're just not very good because the food still has to be cheap (read: processed) to make it affordable. But thanks for playing, Slapnuts.

We have the fattest "poor" people in the entire world, yet we still gladly hand them the means to overfill shopping carts at the Taxpayer's expense. Poor people can buy far more with their benefit card than most people can with their wallets. By limits I mean quantity, and excess.

 

[Ernie S.]

Don't know if he would, but I sure as **** would. She's hot eight ways from Sunday, definitely the best looking First Lady since Jackie O, and a damn sight better than ANY Republican First Lady...ever. I mean, as much as I'd love to give Barbara Bush a motorboat and all.

Sad that your blind partisanship can't even allow you to see the gorgeousness that is Mrs. Obama.

Talk about blind partisanship! The woman is UGLY
Desiree Rogers is HOT and moosechelle can't handle that.

She's really not UGLY. She may not be your cup of tea, but come on.

OK I'll give you that. It has a good deal, I suppose, to do with how I think about her as a person. In my perception, her inner ugliness shows through to the outside.
With Rogers, her hotness overwhelms and possible inner ugly

 

[ConservaDerrps]

You still haven't answered my question as to why we don't hear Liberal's wanting to put "limits" on Food Stamps? Since you're on the subject of Hypocrisy, and obesity.

What do you mean by limits? You mean what you can buy with it? There are limits, they're just not very good because the food still has to be cheap (read: processed) to make it affordable. But thanks for playing, Slapnuts.

We have the fattest "poor" people in the entire world, yet we still gladly hand them the means to overfill shopping carts at the Taxpayer's expense. Poor people can buy far more with their benefit card than most people can with their wallets. By limits I mean quantity, and excess.

Apples and oranges, and completely, 100% untrue. I've been in line at the grocery store many, many, many times behind people using assistance programs for groceries and I've never seen them get more than me, or leave with a massive full shopping cart. That's bullshit rhetoric defined, son.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Talk about blind partisanship! The woman is UGLY
Desiree Rogers is HOT and moosechelle can't handle that.

She's really not UGLY. She may not be your cup of tea, but come on.

OK I'll give you that. It has a good deal, I suppose, to do with how I think about her as a person. In my perception, her inner ugliness shows through to the outside.
With Rogers, her hotness overwhelms and possible inner ugly

Inner ugliness? You mean you don't like her HUSBAND's politics and you're playing guilt by association right? What possible reason would you have for thinking she's an ugly person?

 

[bobcollum]

No offense, but that sort of thinking is just too lame.

Let's have laws requiring daily exercise, too.

And, who cares if an individual gags when they have to eat a vegetable, force them - it's the law.

And, prohibit all forms of rock and mountain climbing - it's too ******* dangerous and someone might have to pay for their healthcare.

Bicycling is dangerous, too. Outlaw it.

Stop producing cars, and certainly don't allow anyone to drive those death traps.

Too many bathtub injuries per year - baths are now illegal.

And, ONLY a person certified by the government, of course, can slice breakfast bagels - too many folks cut themselves each year doing so.

Etc.

That's why it's slippery.

Lame, maybe, but in the end it's true with respect to that issue, others have to take on the cost of unrelated people and their reckless habits.

I don't care if people can responsibly care for themselves after they did something stupid, those people aren't the problem. It's when someone's problem becomes the problem of another that I take issue with. If you're reckless with a gun and you shoot yourself in the leg, I don't care, If you shoot someone else in the leg, my opinion greatly changes.

Your post in a way to an extent is similar to the anti-gay marriage crowd that worries it will lead to people getting married to animals or trees. I don't mean that out of disrespect, but to take it to the extreme of your perspective, why have any laws at all? People should know what's right and what's wrong.

Laws that are limited, and it's perfectly clear when they are, are good laws.

The slippery slope laws are not good laws, especially since we are a nation based on common law.

It's pretty simple and clear.

Reality is not some utopia that can be legislated and that reality includes folks who don't act the way you want them to act.

Many laws do just that, they address those folks who don't act the way the society sees as proper. We may just have to agree to disagree, and I have no problem with that.

It's not about the action, it's about how those actions affect me and others...that's really my whole point. I'm surprised of the disagreement from a Conservative about having to foot the bill for another persons lack of responsibility.

I don't think we need to go to the point of making laws about fast food and yada yada...but to get closer to the op, I think Michelle Obama encouraging people to eat healthier is the right way to go, but unfortunately she gets assailed by some on the right for it. It's a serious issue that needs to be addressed by the whole country before it gets any worse.

 

[asaratis]

There is no doubt...after Obama and his band of Czars have been swept from power, there will still be enough goofiness and about the right total mentality to produce several seasons of the Jerry Springer Show.

Fuckin' IDIOTS!

I do not recall any administration since I became aware of politics that appears as comical and incompetent as Obama and Company. What a joke!!

 

[Ernie S.]

YEAH! **** someone for wanting Americans to be healthy! WHAT A ******* *****!

it's none of yours or her business what Americans eat.. dumbass.

Yes it is. When obesity is an epidemic like it is (And I'm a fat **** saying this), it's everyone's business. Why? Because who's going to pay the medical bills? I know in YOUR vision of the world the fatties would just die in the street. But since that's not really realistic, it's important for all of us to make better decisions about what we put in our bodies.

That said, I hope the Red states continue to dump fried shit down their faces. Seems like that's just evolution doing its thing for us.

Your weight is not my responsibility, or Mrs. obama's.
I have maintained essentially the same weight since high school and I did that without michelle obama's help. So sorry you couldn't.

 

[Ernie S.]

YEAH! **** someone for wanting Americans to be healthy! WHAT A ******* *****!

it's none of yours or her business what Americans eat.. dumbass.

Slippery slope...It becomes my business, and your business, when these irresponsible eaters need health-care and can't afford it, among other things. Obviously it doesn't include all people that eat like that, but still...

So hit them in the pocketbook. Charge fat people more for health care in stead of making nanny state laws to protect them from their irresponsible behavior.
I struggle to keep weight on my skinny frame. Why should I not be able to purchase high calorie snacks and drinks because YOU lack self control?

 

[Si modo]

That's why it's slippery.

Lame, maybe, but in the end it's true with respect to that issue, others have to take on the cost of unrelated people and their reckless habits.

I don't care if people can responsibly care for themselves after they did something stupid, those people aren't the problem. It's when someone's problem becomes the problem of another that I take issue with. If you're reckless with a gun and you shoot yourself in the leg, I don't care, If you shoot someone else in the leg, my opinion greatly changes.

Your post in a way to an extent is similar to the anti-gay marriage crowd that worries it will lead to people getting married to animals or trees. I don't mean that out of disrespect, but to take it to the extreme of your perspective, why have any laws at all? People should know what's right and what's wrong.

Laws that are limited, and it's perfectly clear when they are, are good laws.

The slippery slope laws are not good laws, especially since we are a nation based on common law.

It's pretty simple and clear.

Reality is not some utopia that can be legislated and that reality includes folks who don't act the way you want them to act.

Many laws do just that, they address those folks who don't act the way the society sees as proper. We may just have to agree to disagree, and I have no problem with that.

It's not about the action, it's about how those actions affect me and others...that's really my whole point. I'm surprised of the disagreement from a Conservative about having to foot the bill for another persons lack of responsibility.

I don't think we need to go to the point of making laws about fast food and yada yada...but to get closer to the op, I think Michelle Obama encouraging people to eat healthier is the right way to go, but unfortunately she gets assailed by some on the right for it. It's a serious issue that needs to be addressed by the whole country before it gets any worse.

Well, my point is the benefits of limited laws far outweigh the negatives of paying for lardos' medical care. Because we ARE based on common law, we pass laws trying to engineer society to fit some sort of utopia, we have no limit.

Freedom is not free of charge.

Slippery slopes are extremely dangerous in common law nations - unless someone thinks the society described by Orwell is desirable.