PDA

View Full Version : Question For Lurking DUmmies(2 Can Play This Game)



NJCardFan
04-18-2012, 01:51 PM
This is a question for the lurking DUmmies:

You and your ilk like to go on about how you don't want the government in your bedrooms so I ask you. Why is it you don't mind having them in your kitchen?

Deadhead
04-18-2012, 02:30 PM
I'm not a DUmmie, and I think I know what you mean, but would you mind clarifying a bit?

txradioguy
04-18-2012, 02:46 PM
I'm not a DUmmie, and I think I know what you mean, but would you mind clarifying a bit?

I'm guessing he's talking about Michelle and her over reach into our kitchens trying to regulate what we eat and how much.

Deadhead
04-18-2012, 02:58 PM
I'm guessing he's talking about Michelle and her over reach into our kitchens trying to regulate what we eat and how much.That's what I thought. And yea, good point. I'm pretty sure I wasn't the only one seeing a growing food nazi trend here.

Ya know, if I could afford to pay $4 for an organic tomato, I would be eating alot healthier. Sad thing is, in Obama's economy, I don't have that luxury.

Rockntractor
04-18-2012, 03:06 PM
That's what I thought. And yea, good point. I'm pretty sure I wasn't the only one seeing a growing food nazi trend here.

Ya know, if I could afford to pay $4 for an organic tomato, I would be eating alot healthier. Sad thing is, in Obama's economy, I don't have that luxury.

I bet you have a GaPeach now and the don't you?

Deadhead
04-18-2012, 03:28 PM
I bet you have a GaPeach now and the don't you?
Sheeeeeeit, I'm going to the store tonight after work to get some. I got a blender as a housewarming present and I've been making different smoothie combinations and peach and some other kind of fruit I haven't decided on is up next

noonwitch
04-18-2012, 03:45 PM
I'm not lurking and I'm not a DUmmie, but I am a liberal.

I don't have a problem with the USDA setting standards for the produce and meat that I buy. I don't have a problem with Michelle Obama's efforts to encourage people to eat healthier diets. I have yet to see a valid example of anyone being forced by the federal government to eat a healthier diet.


That school example used so frequently is a situation where a local school district forced a mother to pay for a school meal because they didn't feel the mom had packed a nutritious enough meal for the kid is a local or state matter, depending on the specifics. The person who made that decision is to blame, and is probably a local school official who is a little drunk on his or her own power. The parents should refuse to pay and should address the matter via school board meetings.

Odysseus
04-18-2012, 06:26 PM
This is a question for the lurking DUmmies:

You and your ilk like to go on about how you don't want the government in your bedrooms so I ask you. Why is it you don't mind having them in your kitchen?

Wait a minute, the DUmmies are all about having the government in their bedrooms. They want their birth control to be provided at taxpayer expense, they demand that we recognize anything that they think is a marriage, regardless of whether it has ever been one before, they want the government to teach kids to put condoms on bananas... The DUmmies want the government to treat sex the way that Obama treats healthcare, as something that you have a right to, even at somebody else's expense.

NJCardFan
04-19-2012, 11:52 AM
Still waiting for an answer to this question.

JoeKwonDo
04-19-2012, 12:08 PM
That school example used so frequently is a situation where a local school district forced a mother to pay for a school meal because they didn't feel the mom had packed a nutritious enough meal for the kid is a local or state matter, depending on the specifics. The person who made that decision is to blame, and is probably a local school official who is a little drunk on his or her own power. The parents should refuse to pay and should address the matter via school board meetings.

You miss the point here - where do you think they get the feeling that they [these school "officials"] have the power to make such a decision? - This is another example of trickle down Obama-socialistnomics. Once you let the genie out of the bottle you libbies will be doing a giant OH SHIT what did we do - a real life Pandora's box.

NJCardFan
04-19-2012, 12:16 PM
You miss the point here - where do you think they get the feeling that they [these school "officials"] have the power to make such a decision? - This is another example of trickle down Obama-socialistnomics. Once you let the genie out of the bottle you libbies will be doing a giant OH SHIT what did we do - a real life Pandora's box.

Well put. It's one thing for a school to decide what a child eats when they are providing the meal, however, when a parent provides the meal from home, the school doesn't have the right or authority to tell a parent what to feed their child. However, the Obama's have begun to change all of that. And the liberals are lapping it up like a dog with a plate of pate. Only a matter of time before this makes it into our kitchens.

Lanie
04-19-2012, 01:19 PM
This is a question for the lurking DUmmies:

You and your ilk like to go on about how you don't want the government in your bedrooms so I ask you. Why is it you don't mind having them in your kitchen?

As a woman, I do very much mind them being in my kitchen. Get out! lol.

on edit: But in all honesty, if I have to choose between the two......

As I heard a priest say a while back, the Democrat and Republican party deserve each other. I believe that.

Arroyo_Doble
04-19-2012, 01:21 PM
Still waiting for an answer to this question.

If they are lurking, how would they answer?

Rockntractor
04-19-2012, 01:44 PM
If they are lurking, how would they answer?

You just did!http://www.smiley-lol.com/smiley/asile/fouhelico.gif

ABC in Georgia
04-19-2012, 01:51 PM
You just did!http://www.smiley-lol.com/smiley/asile/fouhelico.gif

Ha! Ha!

Good one, Rock! ... :applause:

~ ABC

Arroyo_Doble
04-19-2012, 02:08 PM
You just did!http://www.smiley-lol.com/smiley/asile/fouhelico.gif

I figured if he wanted my answer to the question, he would have asked.

Zathras
04-19-2012, 03:20 PM
I figured if he wanted my answer to the question, he would have asked.

He did ask for your answer. It's in the thread title.

Novaheart
04-19-2012, 03:40 PM
That's what I thought. And yea, good point. I'm pretty sure I wasn't the only one seeing a growing food nazi trend here.

Ya know, if I could afford to pay $4 for an organic tomato, I would be eating alot healthier. Sad thing is, in Obama's economy, I don't have that luxury.

I aim for organic but I am a realist on a budget. I shop the labels more than the hype. I don't buy organic produce unless it's better. I avoid buying anything processed which has additives like anything-phosphate, chlorides, potassiums, acids and salts. There are actually a number of staples which can be purchased at Walmart or Publix which have little or no additives. I am not going to pay $4/lb for organic rice or pasta when I can buy unadulterated rice and pasta in the regular store. Just last night I was at GFS Marketplace (formerly Smart And Final) and found their whole wheat pasta was the most basic and un"enriched" pasta of any brand I have come across. Mahatma Basmati has no additives.

Organic Japanese tea crackers are cheaper than potato chips and better for you while giving you the crunch you seek.

When the Stevia sodas come down in price, a whole new world will have arrived.

Novaheart
04-19-2012, 03:43 PM
Why is it you don't mind having them in your kitchen?

I think we all not only want the government in our kitchens, but count on it being there. Just as we count on them being in our medicine cabinet.

We want to know what is in our food. We want someone checking to make sure the labels are truthful. We want our drugs to be pure, safe, and effective (except people who want voodoo cures over medicine).

NJCardFan
04-19-2012, 11:04 PM
I think we all not only want the government in our kitchens, but count on it being there. Just as we count on them being in our medicine cabinet.

We want to know what is in our food. We want someone checking to make sure the labels are truthful. We want our drugs to be pure, safe, and effective (except people who want voodoo cures over medicine).

Making sure the food you eat is free of poisons or anything harmful is one thing but mandating what you actually eat is quite another and you know it. However you're the one who didn't see a school taking a child's home prepared lunch away and forced to eat processed chicken nuggets was wrong so your answer figures.

txradioguy
04-20-2012, 02:32 AM
I think we all not only want the government in our kitchens, but count on it being there. Just as we count on them being in our medicine cabinet.

We want to know what is in our food. We want someone checking to make sure the labels are truthful. We want our drugs to be pure, safe, and effective (except people who want voodoo cures over medicine).

So you have no problem with the likes of Michelle Obama coming in and telling you what to eat how much and when?

I guess you'll be the first in line for the new GE microwave with the MyPlate option.

Janice
04-20-2012, 04:11 AM
I guess it sort of comes down to whether you would prefer to be shackled by an authoritative regime for the promise of security or would you prefer to endure some risk for the rewards of freedom. The world is full of places you can get the former. Including prisons in this country. But that is not how this country was founded.

Appears to be a tough decision for some, esp democrats and liberal moderates and republicans.

Lanie
04-21-2012, 06:47 AM
He did ask for your answer. It's in the thread title.

He said lurking DUmmies, not all liberals. I answered it because I know that people on this board have trouble understanding that not all liberals post on DU or that there's a world outside of DU and CU, but there is a difference.

txradioguy
04-21-2012, 09:06 AM
He said lurking DUmmies, not all liberals. I answered it because I know that people on this board have trouble understanding that not all liberals post on DU or that there's a world outside of DU and CU, but there is a difference.

And yet as a Liberal AND a member of DU you felt compelled to answer. :rolleyes:

Wei Wu Wei
04-22-2012, 11:29 AM
Making sure the food you eat is free of poisons or anything harmful is one thing but mandating what you actually eat is quite another and you know it.

So how about supporting the former and objecting to the latter?

I've been eating more healthy and getting more exercise lately, and it's very helpful to have information readily available.

No one from the government has tried to slap a sugary, fat-dripping cholesterol bomb out of my hand before I eat it, but it does help to have all of this information clearly available. It also helps to have guidelines and suggestions ready. I'm no nutritionists so it helps to have the information there.

I don't see whatever inconsistency you are trying to point out.


However you're the one who didn't see a school taking a child's home prepared lunch away and forced to eat processed chicken nuggets was wrong so your answer figures.

That event was uncalled for and a mistake on the part of the school.

Rockntractor
04-22-2012, 11:32 AM
So how about supporting the former and objecting to the latter?

I've been eating more healthy and getting more exercise lately, and it's very helpful to have information readily available.

No one from the government has tried to slap a sugary, fat-dripping cholesterol bomb out of my hand before I eat it, but it does help to have all of this information clearly available. It also helps to have guidelines and suggestions ready. I'm no nutritionists so it helps to have the information there.

I don't see whatever inconsistency you are trying to point out.



That event was uncalled for and a mistake on the part of the school.

You have unfinished business sweetie, go finish the thread you started and answer the questions and then come back here.
http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?48640-Why-Conservative-Ideology-is-the-same-as-%28Soviet%29-Marxist-Ideology-%28only-inverted%29

Odysseus
04-22-2012, 11:41 AM
So how about supporting the former and objecting to the latter?

I've been eating more healthy and getting more exercise lately, and it's very helpful to have information readily available.

No one from the government has tried to slap a sugary, fat-dripping cholesterol bomb out of my hand before I eat it, but it does help to have all of this information clearly available. It also helps to have guidelines and suggestions ready. I'm no nutritionists so it helps to have the information there.

I don't see whatever inconsistency you are trying to point out.

That's because you live in Texas. If you lived in NYC, you'd be unable to purchase any prepared food made with transfats in any licensed establishment. In San Francisco, they've banned Happy Meals. The nanny state is advancing, but because your corner of it isn't as "progressive", you assume that it isn't encroaching on the rest of us.


That event was uncalled for and a mistake on the part of the school.

No, it was called for, by the very people that we're discussing. They want a world in which our diet is subject to their approval. They want absolute power. The absolute corruption will take care of itself.

Rockntractor
04-22-2012, 11:53 AM
You still have not finished the other thread Wei.

Wei Wu Wei
04-22-2012, 12:04 PM
That's because you live in Texas. If you lived in NYC, you'd be unable to purchase any prepared food made with transfats in any licensed establishment. In San Francisco, they've banned Happy Meals. The nanny state is advancing, but because your corner of it isn't as "progressive", you assume that it isn't encroaching on the rest of us.

I don't know how I feel about these bans in other places. It seems like a lot of swinging at the wrong places. Trying to solve real problems with ineffective and frankly stupid means.

I hope this doesn't catch on around the country.




No, it was called for, by the very people that we're discussing. They want a world in which our diet is subject to their approval. They want absolute power. The absolute corruption will take care of itself.

I don't think it's absolute power they want as much as it is they just want some issue or cause to crusade around. Liberals have lost all sense of real political struggle so they find their pet causes in issues like school bullying or trans fats, and they whip up a firestorm that they can rally about.

Wei Wu Wei
04-22-2012, 12:05 PM
Now allow me to ask a question:

Why is it that many (but not all) right-wingers support the War on Drugs, extending to relatively harmless drugs like marijuana, but they see increasing food regulations and promoting healthy lifestyles as an overreach of power?

Let's look at the two:

Healthy Eating Iniative:
The Record: Purely voluntary, no police have ever come into someone's home to tell them their food was unhealthy. No individual has ever been fined or arrested or put in prison for eating foods that the government thought was unhealthy.
The Justification: They say it's for your own good. Unhealthy foods can harm or kill you, heart disease is one of the leading causes of death in the US and it is strongly linked to unhealthy lifestyles. Parents who buy unhealthy foods and prepare it for their children are putting their children's health and safety on the line, so other people are directly affected. Also, with increased health problems, the already sky-rocketing cost of health care increases, so there is an economic issue on the line.

War on Drugs (marijuana):
The Record: Purely compulsory, all over the country people have police enter their homes to search for drugs like marijuana. The United States has the largest prison population in the entire world as a percent of the population, and this can be directly linked to harsher enforcement of drug laws. Many individuals have been punished for drug violations, and a drug violation on your record can permanently destroy your opportunities for gainful employment. Billions of dollars go into fighting this War on Drugs.
The Justification: They say it's for your own good. Drugs can harm or kill you (although no marijuana overdose has ever been documented). Being under the influence of any drugs, legal or illegal may influence your decision making. Children who are exposed to drugs or who have access to drugs may end up trying it at an early age, putting them at many health and psychological risks. Although there are healthy ways to consume marijuana, smoking it causes lung problems.


If you believe that the government encouraging healthy lifestyles is an overreach of power, how do you support the War on Drugs, which is FAR more expansive in the scope and depth of power and enforcement?

NJCardFan
04-22-2012, 12:43 PM
An eating healthy initiative is one thing. Nothing wrong with promoting the general welfare. However, mandates are quite another as I pointed out when a school took away a perfectly good lunch prepared for a child by her mother and not only was she forced to eat chicken nuggets(which, as we know, are processed chicken meat full of preservatives then deep fried) but her family was forced to pay for it. This isn't an initiative, this is out and out intrusion. As for the war on drugs, I'm not a big advocate of it, however, if this is all you got, then you already lose the argument. Not everyone uses or wants to use drugs, however, everyone needs to eat so your strawman fails.

Wei Wu Wei
04-22-2012, 03:59 PM
An eating healthy initiative is one thing. Nothing wrong with promoting the general welfare. However, mandates are quite another as I pointed out when a school took away a perfectly good lunch prepared for a child by her mother and not only was she forced to eat chicken nuggets(which, as we know, are processed chicken meat full of preservatives then deep fried) but her family was forced to pay for it. This isn't an initiative, this is out and out intrusion. As for the war on drugs, I'm not a big advocate of it, however, if this is all you got, then you already lose the argument. Not everyone uses or wants to use drugs, however, everyone needs to eat so your strawman fails.

It sounds like we are pretty much in agreement here.

Information campaigns are good, promoting general welfare through knowledge is good (although forcing people to live healthy is different).

The same applies to the war on drugs. Information campaigns are good, resources for people to choose healthy lifestyles are important, but punishing people for what they do with their body is too far.

I think we can agree there needs to be some limits (there should be some food safety regulations to ensure the food we buy isn't going to poison us, and especially dangerous and addictive drugs like methamphetamine or heroin should never be allowed to be openly sold.), however the government should not be going into your home to punish you for what you do with your own body, whether it's drinking a margarita, eating chocolate cake, smoking a joint, supersizing your big mac meal, or having a cigarette after sex.

It's just about being reasonable and consistent.

Odysseus
04-22-2012, 10:36 PM
I don't know how I feel about these bans in other places. It seems like a lot of swinging at the wrong places. Trying to solve real problems with ineffective and frankly stupid means.

I hope this doesn't catch on around the country.

We're trying to keep it from catching on, but the left keeps finding opportunities to create crises and then exploit them.


I don't think it's absolute power they want as much as it is they just want some issue or cause to crusade around. Liberals have lost all sense of real political struggle so they find their pet causes in issues like school bullying or trans fats, and they whip up a firestorm that they can rally about.

Liberals, progressives and other leftists seek to control whatever they can. If they can feminize boys through school bullying, or control individuals through diet, they are happy to do so.


Now allow me to ask a question:

Why is it that many (but not all) right-wingers support the War on Drugs, extending to relatively harmless drugs like marijuana, but they see increasing food regulations and promoting healthy lifestyles as an overreach of power?

One could argue that hard drugs do more damage than soft drinks, but even that doesn't cover the various nuances that you are missing. First, while some conservatives favor the current War on Drugs, many do not, and many leftists are just as gung ho about it. In fact, the war on drugs began with Prohibition, a Progressive cause if ever there was one. It was the Progressive mania for control that led to the illegalization of alcohol, and the subsequent increase in governmental law enforcement power, out of a misguided belief that if you eliminated alcohol, you'd eliminate the root cause of drunkeness, with the associated poor behaviors that accompanied it. Marijuana is assumed to have been legal before the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, and at the federal level, it was, but it was illegal in most states and municipalities. The CSA federalized the ban and made importation a crime. So, while drug prohibition is often lumped in with conservatives, it was the progressive left that first enacted it in the US and kept it going. Also, most countries are even more prohibitive of cannabis than the US is. See below for the map.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/World-cannabis-laws.png

Elspeth
04-22-2012, 11:10 PM
I aim for organic but I am a realist on a budget. I shop the labels more than the hype. I don't buy organic produce unless it's better. I avoid buying anything processed which has additives like anything-phosphate, chlorides, potassiums, acids and salts. There are actually a number of staples which can be purchased at Walmart or Publix which have little or no additives. I am not going to pay $4/lb for organic rice or pasta when I can buy unadulterated rice and pasta in the regular store. Just last night I was at GFS Marketplace (formerly Smart And Final) and found their whole wheat pasta was the most basic and un"enriched" pasta of any brand I have come across. Mahatma Basmati has no additives.



But if the rice is not organic, it might be GMO.

Lanie
04-23-2012, 09:57 AM
And yet as a Liberal AND a member of DU you felt compelled to answer. :rolleyes:

Why not? I find it important to stress that I want people out of my bedroom and my kitchen. Stay away from my cheesecake!!!

Rockntractor
04-23-2012, 10:03 AM
Why not? I find it important to stress that I want people out of my bedroom .

I thought you were looking for a boyfriend.http://planetsmilies.net/confused-smiley-17702.gif (http://planetsmilies.net)

NJCardFan
04-23-2012, 10:44 AM
Why not? I find it important to stress that I want people out of my bedroom and my kitchen. Stay away from my cheesecake!!!

Ah, but your hero and his wife want to control what you eat.

Lanie
04-23-2012, 12:27 PM
I thought you were looking for a boyfriend.http://planetsmilies.net/confused-smiley-17702.gif (http://planetsmilies.net)

Apparently, I have one whether I like it or not. I told him I only want to be friends, but he keeps holding out hope even though after a year I've never even kissed him. His parents don't help with their constantly referring to me as his girlfriend. Other strangers refer to me as his girlfriend. I'm afraid I'm going to wake up one day and find out my last name got changed. I try to be just friends with a male, but it doesn't seem to work out.

Meanwhile, I've been putting the moves on this guy from one of my church meetings. I'm afraid if I actually get with him or some other guy, that Guy number one will think I cheated on him.

Either that, or I'll get with this new guy, and then wake up the next morning to find out my last name got changed. That I got dragged to countryside USA and got forced into marriage.

Help!

Maybe Romney or Obama could help out with this? Nope. Santorum? Maybe. We need an amendment that says that marriage is between two people who consent. lol.

Rant off.

Lanie
04-23-2012, 12:29 PM
Ah, but your hero and his wife want to control what you eat.

He isn't my hero. Romney isn't my hero either.