🤑 ⏳ Last chance to grab those Amazon Prime Deals! (Don’t miss out—click here to check them out!) 🛒✨

If GOP is upset about Michele Obama's anti-obesity campaign...

Jarhead...

You weren't even USING the word cause or philanthropy before I interjected the terms.

You're making another distinction without a difference...and digging your heels in.

Be a fuckwit if you want, you're simply wrong.

No I wasnt. I was using the word legislation...you then started to cite cause and philanthropy and I addressed it saying that there is a difference between cause and philanthropy...and legislation.

I was simplyt asking a legit question.....and youstill have not answered it.

Sure...many First Ladys rode their husbands backs to get legislation passed....but none that I know of used tax payers money top run ads to get public support for legislation....and all I ahve been asking of you is to cite one that did.

Yet you wont......and I dont see where I am wrong......since you cannot cite a single first lady that ran ads and billboards saying how important it is for government to do something....
 
I’m waiting to hear the GOP base explain why Michelle Obama is a bad First Lady for advocating against childhood obesity, but Callista Gingrich would be a good First Lady even though she had an affair with a married man and broke up his marriage.

Anyone want to take a 'spin'? :lol:

She's a do as I say and not do as I do person. Exactly what is her authority as a spokes person against obesity? What is her training on the subject? Is she a food nutritionist?
 
I noticed that the youngest daughter is starting to get chubby.

That's why Michelle got started on this path. Her daughter's doctor said her BMI was a bit high.

Thats ashame.

I don't beleive in the BMI foolishness and if a Dr. told me my kid who looks like her has problem I would get another Dr. The irony I see is that Michelle buys into it.

I am not saying the healthy eating advice is wrong.
 
Jarhead...

You weren't even USING the word cause or philanthropy before I interjected the terms.

You're making another distinction without a difference...and digging your heels in.

Be a fuckwit if you want, you're simply wrong.

No I wasnt. I was using the word legislation...you then started to cite cause and philanthropy and I addressed it saying that there is a difference between cause and philanthropy...and legislation.

I was simplyt asking a legit question.....and youstill have not answered it.

Sure...many First Ladys rode their husbands backs to get legislation passed....but none that I know of used tax payers money top run ads to get public support for legislation....and all I ahve been asking of you is to cite one that did.

Yet you wont......and I dont see where I am wrong......since you cannot cite a single first lady that ran ads and billboards saying how important it is for government to do something....

And that's why you're a fuckwit.

You dont get that ANYTHING that ANY of the first ladies do is based on taxpayer money. Their office is funded with it...and the work they do is supported by it. All the modern first ladies have pushed for legislation around their pet topics. For example, I quoted from a source that you fail to recognize about how Nancy pushed anti-drug legislation. So much so that her husband handed her the pen to sign it into law. That's a FACT.

If you want to keep being a fuckwit....go for it. I'm done. You're wrong and I've proven it. Anyone with common sense would have abandoned your position a long while back. But you can't...because this is part of your unyielding hatred for the Obamas. If you gave one inch you feel like you'd be giving up a mile.

There are lots of things I dislike about Barry Oblammy. I probably won't vote for him again. But at least I can be intellectually objective about it.
 
Last edited:
Jarhead...

You weren't even USING the word cause or philanthropy before I interjected the terms.

You're making another distinction without a difference...and digging your heels in.

Be a fuckwit if you want, you're simply wrong.

No I wasnt. I was using the word legislation...you then started to cite cause and philanthropy and I addressed it saying that there is a difference between cause and philanthropy...and legislation.

I was simplyt asking a legit question.....and youstill have not answered it.

Sure...many First Ladys rode their husbands backs to get legislation passed....but none that I know of used tax payers money top run ads to get public support for legislation....and all I ahve been asking of you is to cite one that did.

Yet you wont......and I dont see where I am wrong......since you cannot cite a single first lady that ran ads and billboards saying how important it is for government to do something....

And that's why you're a fuckwit.

You dont get that ANYTHING that ANY of the first ladies do is based on taxpayer money. Their office is funded with it...and the work they do is supported by it. All the modern first ladies have pushed for legislation around their pet topics. For example, I quoted from a source that you fail to recognize about how Nancy pushed anti-drug legislation. So much so that her husband handed her the pen to sign it into law. That's a FACT.

If you want to keep being a fuckwit....go for it. I'm done. You're wrong and I've proven it. Anyone with common sense would have abandoned your position a long while back. But you can't...because this is part of your unyielding hatred for the Obamas. If you gave one inch you feel like you'd be giving up a mile.

There are lots of things I dislike about Barry Oblammy. I probably won't vote for him again. But at least I can be intellectually objective about it.


What first lady used tax payer money to to run ads and biullboards to push legislation..

Aw hell...forget it......I didnt realize I was dealing with an ideologue that cant see through his own fucking childish clouds to understand a simple question.

Ive had enough of this. Nice diversion.

Fine...you win. They all ran ads and had billboards on every intersatate in the country....all at the cost of the taxpayer.

Cya.
 
Hey, fuckwit.

Laura Bush Announces $2 Million Grant for Literacy Programs

Here's 2 million dollars of your money Laura Bush gave away for literacy to *gasp* other countries! Not even to our own people! (PLEASE PLEASE dont be a fuckwit and say that this was simply philanthropy and had nothing to do with government or require governmental legislation or at the very least approval)

It must suck to be living in your world where the Obamas are the anti-Christ.
 
Hey, fuckwit.

Laura Bush Announces $2 Million Grant for Literacy Programs

Here's 2 million dollars of your money Laura Bush gave away for literacy to *gasp* other countries! Not even to our own people! (PLEASE PLEASE dont be a fuckwit and say that this was simply philanthropy and had nothing to do with government or require governmental legislation or at the very least approval)

It must suck to be living in your world where the Obamas are the anti-Christ.

Number one.....I would never have supported that grant.

Number two......do you have any idea what legislation is?

Maybe THAT is the problem?
 
Michele is a hypocrite.

fatbuttmichelleobamaima.jpg


angrymichelleobamajpg1.jpg

My Lord that is one fugly woman.
 
Healthy kids reduce healthcare costs overall. they provide a better work force in the future.

Your IQ is actually less than your penis size in inches, isn't it?

Struggle to grasp that you placed possession of children in the hands of the government - you mindless little Stalinist.

Seriously, there are stumps out there that are substantially smarter than you.

Integrity indeed! You gots it!
 
Guess who Chelsea's father is. (Hint: It's not Bill.)

Madeline Albright? Janet Reno?

Just a guess.

:lol: I suppose it's possible. No, it's Webster Hubbell. Just look at their pictures side-by-side. Bill Clinton became sterile when he got the mumps as a child. The only reason Chelsea was born was because Bill Clinton wanted to run for Governor and he knew he would never get elected in Arkansas if he didn't have a family. (That's why he married Hillary, even though it's always been a marriage of convenience.) This is yet another story the MSM covered-up, but is well-known in Arkansas.
 
I don't recall Ms. Obama saying anything about forcing anyone to abstain from anything entirely. She advocates eating a balanced diet. Why are cons jumping on her for eating ribs? She's in great shape.
 
Guess who Chelsea's father is. (Hint: It's not Bill.)

Madeline Albright? Janet Reno?

Just a guess.

:lol: I suppose it's possible. No, it's Webster Hubbell. Just look at their pictures side-by-side. Bill Clinton became sterile when he got the mumps as a child. The only reason Chelsea was born was because Bill Clinton wanted to run for Governor and he knew he would never get elected in Arkansas if he didn't have a family. (That's why he married Hillary, even though it's always been a marriage of convenience.) This is yet another story the MSM covered-up, but is well-known in Arkansas.

OMIGOD!!!! :cuckoo:
 
More than one-quarter of America’s young adults are too fat to serve in the U.S. military
February 9th, 2011

- Michelle Obama says many too fat to fight in military

- "Believe it or not, right now, nearly 4% of American males 18-24 years failed basic Army's basic fitness test
of 17- to 24-year-olds are too overweight to serve in our military," she said.

- The report said: "over 27 percent of all Americans 17 to 24 years of age -- over nine million young men and women -- are too heavy to join the military if they want to do so."

- In 2008, there were 11,472,200 Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 who were obese or overweight, the study reported, citing research by the Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. There were 29.8 million Americans between those ages, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. That equals nearly 39 percent of Americans in that age range who were obese or overweight, an even higher percentage than those found in the "Too Fat to Fight" study who couldn’t serve in the military.

- Military officials say this is serious business. "The United States military stands ready to protect the American people, but if our nation does not help ensure that future generations grow up to be healthy and fit ... the health of our children and our national security are at risk," the report says.

- The military discharges about 1,200 recruits a year because they are not fit enough to serve. The military estimates it costs $50,000 to recruit and train a soldier. Add it up and that’s $60 million a year the federal government loses on enlistees too heavy to fight.

The average American man is 5 foot 9 and weighs 195 pounds, according to the CDC. The average American woman is nearly 5 foot 4 and weighs 165 pounds.

Army - An 18-year-old, 5-foot-9 man who weighs more than 175 pounds would raise eyebrows for the Army, according to Military.com. The Army would be similarly concerned about a 5-foot-4, 18-year-old woman who weighs more than 133 pounds.

Navy - considers a 5-foot-9 man greater than 186 pounds overweight, and its maximum standard weight for a 5-foot-4 woman is 156 pounds.

Air Force - the maximum weight for a 5-foot-9 recruit is 186 pounds.

- One U.S. Army general said 4 percent of male recruits at one training center in 2000 failed the most basic fitness. By 2006, more than 20 percent of male recruits failed the same test. The percentages were higher for women.

PolitiFact Georgia | Michelle Obama says many too fat to fight in military
2000 - 4% of American males 18-24 years failed basic Army's basic fitness test

2006 - 20% of American males 18-24 years failed basic Army's basic fitness test

2009 - 27% of American males 18-24 years failed basic Army's basic fitness test ("Too Fat to Fight" study)

2008 - 39% of American 18-24 years were obese or overweight (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Census Bureau)

75% of Americans 18-24 are too Fat, too Sickly or too dumb to meet the minimum standard to join the military
75% of Potential Recruits Too Fat, Too Sickly, Too Dumb to Serve | Danger Room | Wired.com

Based in the data, even a "conservative" should be able to understand that "... if our nation does not help ensure that future generations grow up to be healthy and fit ... the health of our children and our national security are at risk,"

So Michelle Obama is right on the mark, America's military is only as good as the quality of its recruits.
 
Last edited:
I bet these slogans came from Public funds.....Uh oh....



How dare she help with legislation! thats not her job! As per Uncensored retarded thinking.

:clap2: but..but...thats different they were Republicans, see? :cuckoo:

No one is critcizing her pushing the need for parents to ensure better eating habits for their children.

We are disagreeing with her solution of having government do the job for the parents.

Are we no longer allowed to ciriticize legislation becuase it is an Obama who is suggesting it?

Now I think I get your beef. You think that she wants government to do the parents job. Well rest easy, you will still be able to parent your kids. Michelle is promoting better eating habits not replacing or doing parents job.

So everything is cool...
 

Forum List

Back
Top