Palin defends the fatties

[nick1985]

Addressing yourself, nick?

No, I'm addressing LegendKiller

 

[LegendKiller]

foam

Hey, here's an idea, let's degrade this thread into a bunch of 1st grade insults...

I'll start...

"Foam"

 

[Amused]

hardly foaming at the mouth, just saying that Palin's message was stupid and, as already discussed, it has nothing to do with "big government" as she's trying to portray.

How is this message stupid?

"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."

Looks pretty sound to me, or do you believe the opposite? Do you believe that the government should attempt to control our individual decisions about what we do with our bodies and ignore the current economic issues facing our country?

Just askin.

 

[LegendKiller]

How is this message stupid?

"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."

Looks pretty sound to me, or do you believe the opposite? Do you believe that the government should attempt to control our individual decisions about what we do with our bodies and ignore the current economic issues facing our country?

Just askin.

Have you even looked at the website?

Is it really "controlling" anybody? Is it mandating anything? Is it stopping anybody from exercising their "god given" rights?

Show me how, exactly, the government is controlling anything by that website. Because, from what I can tell, it provides information and it encourages people to eat healthier and exercise more.

Error 1984: Government Control Not Found.

 

[Amused]

Have you even looked at the website?

Is it really "controlling" anybody? Is it mandating anything? Is it stopping anybody from exercising their "god given" rights?

Show me how, exactly, the government is controlling anything by that website. Because, from what I can tell, it provides information and it encourages people to eat healthier and exercise more.

Error 1984: Government Control Not Found.

The error here is that is not all that is going on, and you know it. The food police are trying everything in their power to regulate what people eat. Bans and taxes on foods, bans on happy meals... or are those all separate? While the First lady is preaching, her followers are out turning her advice into law.

Did YOU read the article the OP posted???

The writer of the article talks about, and advocates for laws controlling what people eat.

 

[LegendKiller]

The error here is that is not all that is going on, and you know it. The food police are trying everything in their power to regulate what people eat. Bans and taxes on foods, bans on happy meals... or are those all separate? While the First lady is preaching, her followers are out turning her advice into law.

Where?


In NYC you mean? Fuck yes, I think people who sit there drinking coke, eating fries and burgers, and sucking down cancer sticks should pay more in taxes. They cost society more in medical care.

Now, if they want to opt-out of all public health care, forever, then they can go ahead and do what they want.

Otherwise, control still not found. Please post specific links.

 

[Amused]

Where?


In NYC you mean? Fuck yes, I think people who sit there drinking coke, eating fries and burgers, and sucking down cancer sticks should pay more in taxes. They cost society more in medical care.

Now, if they want to opt-out of all public health care, forever, then they can go ahead and do what they want.

Otherwise, control still not found. Please post specific links.

But that's the rub. You CAN'T opt out of the bans, limits and taxes, now can you?

We've come full circle in our argument in just 3 posts.

You said 1984 not found.

1984 is found quite clearly, and you justify it with "cost to society."

If you don't want to pay, stop voting to pay for it rather than voting away the freedoms of others.

 

[jman19]

foam

Good job bringing this thread to a new low, troll.

 

[hal2kilo]

well, she got to say something everyday to pay back Fox's news for the nice studio in her house.

Just a money whore.

 

[LegendKiller]

But that's the rub. You CAN'T opt out of the bans, limits and taxes, now can you?

We've come full circle in our argument in just 3 posts.

You said 1984 not found.

1984 is found quite clearly, and you justify it with "cost to society."

If you don't want to pay, stop voting to pay for it rather than voting away the freedoms of others.

Nobody is banning anything, they are just saying everything has a cost. It's nothing more than insurance. Those who get into more accidents have to pay higher premiums. Those who are overweight or have heart problems cannot get long-term care, or pay more for life insurance, or medical insurance.

It's a simple equation of cost and risk. To equate that to a nefarious government program to control our lives is rightist demagoguery.

 

[nick1985]

Good job bringing this thread to a new low, troll.

This thread is amazing, I have all my favorite lefties going nuts all in the same place

 

[hal2kilo]

Hey, here's an idea, let's degrade this thread into a bunch of 1st grade insults...

I'll start...

"Foam"

Par for the course in a Nick participated thread.

 

[nick1985]

Par for the course in a Nick participated thread.

Uh, you're one to talk? You came into my N Korea thread and trolled it to high heaven


I'm glad I have your attention though, sure means a lot to me.

 

[hal2kilo]

Uh, you're one to talk? You came into my N Korea thread and trolled it to high heaven


I'm glad I have your attention though, sure means a lot to me.

You and Hacp should get an apartment together and set up a real snake ranch.

 

[CallMeJoe]

The error here is that is not all that is going on, and you know it. The food police are trying everything in their power to regulate what people eat. Bans and taxes on foods, bans on happy meals... or are those all separate? While the First lady is preaching, her followers are out turning her advice into law.
Did YOU read the article the OP posted???
The writer of the article talks about, and advocates for laws controlling what people eat.

I wonder if you read the OP's linked article. Mr. Martin advocated nothing of the sort you claim; he rather quoted retired Major General Paul Monroe and cited a study by Mission: Readiness (a nonprofit group of more than 150 retired generals and admirals) who recommended that Congress revise school nutrition legislation to ensure healthier foods in school lunch programs. No "laws controlling what people eat", just better food in schools.

 

[Amused]

Nobody is banning anything, they are just saying everything has a cost. It's nothing more than insurance. Those who get into more accidents have to pay higher premiums. Those who are overweight or have heart problems cannot get long-term care, or pay more for life insurance, or medical insurance.

It's a simple equation of cost and risk. To equate that to a nefarious government program to control our lives is rightist demagoguery.

Um, no.

There HAVE been bans on foods and fat taxes on sodas and other foods and there will be more to come.

When the government uses laws, bans, limits and taxes to control what individuals do with their own bodies, it's no different, or less useless, than Prohibition and the war on drugs.

Again, you don't want to pay for the risks of others, then vote not to pay. Don't vote away other's freedoms.

Liberalism is willing to live and let live. Not live and control others because you don't want to pay for their mistakes.

BTW, ever notice how sin/fat/health taxes overwhelmingly punish the poor? Funny how that works, huh?

 

[nick1985]

You and Hacp should get an apartment together and set up a real snake ranch.

You didn't address my post. At all. Probably because you are a troll yourself.

 

[Amused]

I wonder if you read the OP's linked article. Mr. Martin advocated nothing of the sort you claim; he rather quoted retired Major General Paul Monroe and cited a study by Mission: Readiness (a nonprofit group of more than 150 retired generals and admirals) who recommended that Congress revise school nutrition legislation to ensure healthier foods in school lunch programs. No "laws controlling what people eat", just better food in schools.

If laws are passed limiting what children may eat in schools, are not laws being passed limiting what people may eat?

And do you really think it will stop in schools?

Do you really believe that food alone is to blame here and there is a bogey man causing obesity???

Can't you spot an overly simplistic and draconian solution to a problem that involves an entire lifestyle?

 

[CallMeJoe]

If laws are passed limiting what children may eat in schools, are not laws being passed limiting what people may eat?

Not limiting what may be eaten in schools, limiting what the government will provide in schools.

And do you really think it will stop in schools?

I have no problem with the government limiting what food it provides people outside of schools.

Do you really believe that food alone is to blame here and there is a bogey man causing obesity???

Food is part of the problem. Do you object to addressing the one part of the childhood obesity problem that government can directly affect? Would you prefer that they do nothing at all?

Can't you spot an overly simplistic and draconian solution to a problem that involves an entire lifestyle?

Draconian? Are we feeling rather hyperbolic this weekend?

 

[nick1985]

I have no problem with the government limiting what food it provides people outside of schools.

Typo somewhere in there I assume?

 

[CallMeJoe]

Typo somewhere in there I assume?

Amused implied that government limiting what food it provided through the school lunch program would somehow affect what people not in school could eat. I merely assert that if the government were to provide food to people outside of school, I have no problem with them limiting the type of foods they provide

Rather like the government restricting the types of food it will provide through the food stamps program...

 

[nick1985]

Rather like the government restricting the types of food it will provide through the food stamps program...

I can get on board with that.

Bread
Milk
Water
Rice
Beans
Cereal (generic)

 

[Amused]

Not limiting what may be eaten in schools, limiting what the government will provide in schools.
I have no problem with the government limiting what food it provides people outside of schools.
Food is part of the problem. Do you object to addressing the one part of the childhood obesity problem that government can directly affect? Would you prefer that they do nothing at all?
Draconian? Are we feeling rather hyperbolic this weekend?

Not at all. The government has been attempting to change individual choice through laws, bans, limits and taxes.

Do I oppose this? You bet. Would I rather the government do nothing vs what they are attempting? You bet.

No amount of obesity is worth me giving up my freedoms and rights.

There is no bogey man causing obesity. It encompasses an entire lifestyle mixed with genetics. No government program is going to stop that short of mandating exercise and limiting access to food. (And price manipulation of food will only lead to starvation of the poorest) The more money they throw at it and fail, the more they will pass new and ever more intrusive laws, limits, bans and taxes.

Just use the war on drugs as a template.

The key here is to stop them now.

 

[Amused]

Amused implied that government limiting what food it provided through the school lunch program would somehow affect what people not in school could eat. I merely assert that if the government were to provide food to people outside of school, I have no problem with them limiting the type of foods they provide

Rather like the government restricting the types of food it will provide through the food stamps program...

If you think this will stop in schools, you're deluded (Happymeal ban).

 

[CallMeJoe]

...No amount of obesity is worth me giving up my freedoms and rights....

Your mommy can still pack whatever she wants in the lunch you carry to school.