White House Super Bowl Party Menu Sticks to ‘Let’s Move’ Theme

White House Super Bowl Party Menu Sticks to ‘Let’s Move’ Theme

By Doug Powers  •  February 7, 2011 11:31 AM

**Written by Doug Powers

Michelle Obama is tightly focused on regulating restaurant nutrition and her anti-obesity campaign these days, so last night’s White House Super Bowl party stuck to the “Let’s move” theme — in a “Hey, there’s cheeseburgers and buffalo wings over there, let’s move!kind of way:

The menu, released by the White House:

*Bratwurst
*Kielbasa
*Cheeseburgers
*Deep Dish Pizza
*Buffalo Wings
*German Potato Salad
*Twice Baked Potatoes
*Snyders Potato Chips and Pretzels
*Chips and Dips
*Salad
*Ice Cream

An article in the Chicago Sun Times explains why the menu is in no way hypocritical:

But the White House Super Bowl menu does not conflict with her healthy eating drive because she has always allowed for lapses when it comes to food-we-love-but-is-bad-for-us, with instructions that junky eats be consumed rarely and in moderation.

That’s right — remember when FLOTUS mercifully approved Thanksgiving pie? We are granted calorie waivers on occasion.

The Obamas should be trusted to know what’s best for their kids and to define “moderation” on their own terms without outside interference and free from accusations of hypocrisy — provided the rest of us are receiving the same considerations in return and not under threat of being chased down by food cops clutching BMI calipers or with restaurants being told what to serve because we’re too stupid to order properly. But that’s not happening.

One more thing — not to nitpick, but the environmentally-conscious White House also violated a basic tenet found in “‘green’ your Super Bowl party” rules & regs by serving beers that weren’t brewed locally:

Beers paid tribute to the states of the Super Bowl teams: Wisconsin’s Hinterland Pale Ale & Amber Ale, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania’s Yuengling Lager and Light.

Paging Al Gore!

Update: As the attendees were scarfing on the best cheeseburgers ever, this PSA from Let’s Move was airing.

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Ron Kind (D-WI-3) Wants The Government To Track How Much Your Daughter Weighs

Ron Kind (D-WI-3) Wants The Government To Track How Much Your Daughter Weighs

 

The Federal Fat Police Are Watching

Posted by Dan McLaughlin (Profile)

Thursday, May 13th at 7:15PM EDT

14 Comments

Hey, remember when we conservatives said that if you let the federal government into everybody’s healthcare, pretty soon it will stick its peering eyes and groping hands into our personal business?

Welcome to “pretty soon,” thanks to Wisconsin Democrat Ron Kind.

Kind has introduced a bill that would commandeer your health insurer to report to the federal government the body mass index (BMI) – i.e., height and weight – of your children every year from age 2 to 18:

States receiving federal grants provided for in the bill would be required to annually track the Body Mass Index of all children ages 2 through 18. The grant-receiving states would be required to mandate that all health care providers in the state determine the Body Mass Index of all their patients in the 2-to-18 age bracket and then report that information to the state government. The state government, in turn, would be required to report the information to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for analysis.

The Healthy Choices Act–introduced by Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wis.), a member of the House Ways and Means Committee….amends the Public Health Services Act by stating that health care providers must record the Body Mass Index of all children ages 2 through 18. “The provision relates to all children in states that accept grants under the bill,” a spokesperson for Rep. Kind told CNSNews.com. “….BMI will be taken at times when the child makes an otherwise scheduled doctor’s visit.”

 

Let’s leave aside the many methodological problems with BMI as a measurement of obesity (such as the fact that muscular, athletic males are almost always classed as obese). The bill requires federal taxpayers to lay out yet more money to create yet another intrusive apparatus for tracking and storing information that, for example, your 16 year old daughter might regard as rather personal:

To pay for implementing BMI data gathering, Sec. 102 of the bill states that the federal government will give grants to states that meet certain criteria, including having “the capacity to store basic demographic information (including date of birth, gender and geographic area of residence), height, weight, and immunization data for each resident of the state.”

The grants also will pay for personnel and equipment necessary to measure patients’ BMI.

And naturally, any child with a BMI over a specified percentile will be nagged to get government help. Of course, Rep. Kind swears that “any data used to generate a report on the BMI data collected would not include patients’ names,” but even if the data-security provisions are foolproof in that regard, there’s still going to be an awful lot of identifiable information that will be required to be stored in government databases. And passed on to “Congress and other government officials, including the secretaries of education and agriculture,” for that matter. The same people who go into shrieking tizzies at the idea of requiring adults to show a valid driver’s licenses as proof of citizenship if they get stopped for traffic violations want to create a gigantic database of children’s physical proportions. This is, by the way, the same Ron Kind whose GOP opponent in 2006 went after his history of supporting, uh, interesting government studies:

The ad states Kind doesn’t have a problem spending money per se, but that “he would just rather spend it on sex.” The ad then details-with citations to various NIH grants-legislation Kind is said to have voted for that included funds to:

1. Study the sex lives of Vietnamese prostitutes.

2. Study the masturbation habits of old men.

3. Study the bisexual, transgendered, and two-spirited Aleutian Eskimos.

4. Pay teenage girls to watch pornographic movies with probes connected to their genitalia.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is government without limits or a sense of personal space. It’s Michelle Obama’s and Ron Kind’s America.

Kind’s district is the classic sort of district that has been safe in years past (it went 51% for John Kerry, 58% for Barack Obama), but is rated D+3 by Charlie Cook, which puts it within reach if the GOP wave this fall rises high enough. If you’d like to help, there are two GOP candidates in the district: two-term State Senator Dan Kapanke has blasted Kind over Obamacare, and you can watch him in action here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSZYLUmyhHw&feature=player_embedded

There’s also a tea party candidate, businessman Bruce Evers. However the party primary turns out, voters in Wisconsin’s Third District will have to decide if they want Uncle Sam ogling their children and nagging them to put down their cheese and bratwurst

It’s curtains for SpongeBob SquarePants Michelle Obama’s Food Police

It’s curtains for SpongeBob SquarePants

Jeannie DeAngelis

SpongeBob SquarePants is about to be harshly reprimanded by the federal government for being a cartoon contributor to childhood diabetes and for making it impossible for kids to fit into “Bikini Bottoms.”

First Lady Michelle Obama, in conjunction with a White House Task Force on Childhood Obesity,is preparing to parent America by cracking down on cafeterias, Chum Bucket fast-food restaurants, Cheez-It® boxes and vending machines

President Obama appointed an, “interagency panel … to develop recommendations for ending childhood obesity within a generation…nam[ing] Michelle Obama to lead the campaign.”   Barry’s comprehensive review of the issue, coupled with Michelle’s expertise, all but guarantee a speedy resolution to the problem of corpulent kiddies.

The Task Force recommended, “media characters … popular with kids should only be used to promote healthy products.”  As a result SpongeBob SquarePants could be swept from the shelves if, “voluntary efforts fail to limit marketing of less healthy products to young viewers.”  If controls fall short, the FCC will take over like Squidward Tentacles and choke the life out marketers refusing to comply.

In the meantime, SpongeBob may be able to salvage his reputation by taking the initiative and”emphasizing the importance of improved nutrition and physical activity.” If the Krabby Patty-loving cartoon character, “swaps deep fryers for salad bars,” and replaces snacking with scuba diving Michelle could decide to grant the popular phylum porifera a reprieve.

The intuitive Mr. Squarepants seems to already be ahead of the curve.  In conjunction with Nickelodeon, it appears as if the spongy one will be appearing on bags of produce even before the FCC, “considers new rules on commercials in children’s programming.”

“Pictures of the happy-go-lucky sponge will appear on packages of carrots, spinach and citrus.”Obviously, SpongeBob living in a pineapple didn’t quite make the standard for acceptable fruit and vegetable promotion.

Regardless of Bob’s preemptive effort, a problem still remains for Mr. Squarepants when “new and dramatic controls on the marketing of unhealthy foods” take effect.  Why? Because the yellow sponge’s picture is plastered all over supermarket shelves stocked with sugary, diabetes causing SpongeBob SquarePants cereal, frozen Popsicle® pop-ups and containers of Breyers®cookie-dough ice cream.

The adipose advisory panel also proposed labeling changes on products and vending machines.  Even restaurants will be advised to, “Display calorie counts.”  Cheating on a diet will require the illegal establishment of underground gastronome speakeasies. Junk food will become obsolete as American children, in lieu of less healthy fare, are prodded like livestock toward rutabaga and radishes.

However, there is a latent benefit to the anti-chubbiness campaign as parents come up with new, innovative rewards to influence good behavior.  Instead of offering lollipops and cookies, parents can say instead, “If you clean your room you won’t have to eat beets and sautéed okra tonight.”  Such incentives will ensure healthy children, as well as establish a nation void of juvenile delinquents and disciplinary problems.

For obstinate, free thinking adults insistent on parenting their own offspring, the Task Force “calls for analyzing the effect of imposing state and local sales taxes on less healthy products.” Moms and Dads will be “nudged” toward healthier choices out of fear of being zapped in the pocketbook with an oversized, beefed-up tax-taser.

TheTask Force finally concluded,”It won’t be easy” to cure childhood obesity. Yet Michelle and Barry shouldn’t back down, because with inordinate amounts of propaganda and governmental restriction, the way fry cook SpongeBob  swore off Krabby Patties, eventually ObamAmerica will submit, in compliance,and recoil in horror at the sight of a Big Mac.

Author’s content: www.jeannie-ology.com

White House Seeks Controls on Food Marketing; Warns of ‘National Health Crisis’ for Children…Obama out of control

White House Task Force Seeks Fight on Childhood Obesity

Posted by Peter Maer

First lady Michelle Obama shakes hands with students after a discussion on childhood obesity, Wednesday, April 7, 2010.

(Credit: AP) A White House report warns, “The childhood obesity epidemic in America is a national health crisis.”

The review by the Task Force on Childhood Obesity says one out of every three children is overweight or obese. The task force is a key part of First Lady Michelle Obama’s campaign to solve the problem of obesity within a generation. President Obama ordered the comprehensive review of the issue.

The report includes familiar themes, emphasizing the importance of improved nutrition and physical activity. It also calls for some new and dramatic controls on the marketing of unhealthy foods.

The task force wants junk food makers and marketers to go on what amounts to an advertising diet. It says media characters that are often popular with kids should only be used to promote healthy products. If voluntary efforts fail to limit marketing of less healthy products to young viewers, the task force suggests the FCC should consider new rules on commercials in children’s programming. It also challenges food retailers to stop using in-store displays to sell unhealthy food items to children.

The advisory panel proposes better food content labeling on products and vending machines. Restaurants and vending machine companies are urged to display calorie counts. The experts say the FDA and USDA should cooperate with the food and beverage industries to develop a standard system of nutrition labeling on the front of packages. The study also suggests that restaurants should re-evaluate portion sizes, improve kids’ menus and list more healthy food choices.

The White House study says school systems should consider efforts to promote healthier food in cafeterias. One idea: “swap deep fryers for salad bars.”

In a proposal that’s sure to be popular with children, the panel says schools should promote recess for younger students and “physical activity breaks” for upper level grades.

The task force also sees a potential pocketbook approach to keep people from buying unhealthy foods. It calls for analyzing the effect of imposing state and local sales taxes on less healthy products.

The report found one out of every three children is overweight or obese, conditions that increase their risk of developing diabetes, heart disease and cancer in their lifetimes. The cost of treating obesity-related ailments is estimated to be $150 billion per year.

The task force concludes that strategies listed in the report “should” achieve the goal of solving the childhood obesity problem within a generation. It concedes it won’t be easy.

Health freedom alert: Congressman Waxman sneaks anti-vitamin amendment into Wall Street reform bill

Health freedom alert: Congressman Waxman sneaks anti-vitamin amendment into Wall Street reform bill

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) Of all the sneaky tactics practiced in Washington D.C., this recent action by Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA) is one of the most insidious: While no one was looking, he injected amendment language into the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 4173) that would expand the powers of the FTC (not the FDA, but the FTC) to terrorize nutritional supplement companies by greatly expanding the power of the FTC to make its own laws that target dietary supplement companies.

This is a little-known secret about the FTC and the nutritional supplements business: The FTC routinely targets nutritional supplement companies that are merely telling the truth about their products. Some companies are threatened by merely linking to published scientific studies about their products.

For example, here’s an important article that describes how to FDA criminally extorts money out of supplement companies: http://www.naturalnews.com/024567_h…

The FTC does much the same thing. They target a particular company that’s having success in the natural products marketplace, then they accuse that company of “inferring” that their products have some health benefit. From there, the FTC demands that the company engage in paying a massive fine to the FTC, which the FTC calls “consumer redress” even though none of the money actually goes to the consumers.

If you try to fight the FTC, they haul you into their own special “FTC courts” which are not public courts where you have the benefit of a jury, but rather they are courts where the judges are actually FTC employees and you have no rights. You are essentially guilty until proven innocent, and virtually no one has been found innocent by the FTC.

If the King says you’re guilty, then you’re guilty

The FTC also forces you to sign a “consent decree” which involves you admitting to committing crimes that you have actually never committed. These crimes include the “criminal misrepresentation of a product” by, for example, explaining that walnuts help support healthy cholesterol levels or that cherries ease symptoms of inflammation.

Using these methods, the FTC has extorted tens of millions of dollars out of nutritional supplement companies. More importantly, it has terrorized the industry and put several companies out of business, denying the American public access to products that could improve their health and prevent disease.

Waxman wants the FTC to have even more power over your vitamins

Now Congressman Henry Waxman wants to give the FTC even more powers by allowing the FTC to write its own laws without Congressional approval. This would allow a rogue agency to simply invent any new law it wants, such as requiring nutritional supplement companies to spend hundreds of millions of dollars “proving” the efficacy of a vitamin before they can sell it.

This will allow the FTC to utterly circumvent DSHEA — the law passed in 1994 that provides basic protections to vitamin and supplement manufacturers. This will result in an FTC war on vitamins and supplements that would no doubt see this rogue agency attempting to destroy the entire industry and imprison the founders and executives of all the top supplement manufacturers.

This is how bad things have become in America today: The criminal CEOs of drug companies are allowed to commit felony crimes, engage in routine price fixing fraud and fix their research with fraudulent clinical trials, yet the FTC and FDA do nothing. But when an honest nutritional supplement company says something like, “Walnuts are good for your heart,” they get threatened with imprisonment or have their entire life savings stolen away from them by the FTC through a series of “fines.”

Your help is urgently needed to halt this madness

Join NaturalNews.com and the Alliance for Natural Health to protest this deceptive action by Henry Waxman — a lifelong opponent of natural medicine who is trying to covertly inject this expansion of FTC powers into the Finance Reform Bill.

Click here to sign the online petition now.

This petition is being organized by the Alliance for Natural Health (http://www.anh-usa.org), a health freedom organization we strongly support here at NaturalNews. Read their announcement and call to action on this bill right here: http://www.anh-usa.org/congressman-…

Your help is urgently needed. I don’t send out a lot of “urgent call to action” articles and emails, but this is one that definitely demands our collective attention. Please call, fax or email your representatives in Washington and strongly voice your opposition to any expansion of powers of the FTC over dietary supplements. The FTC is already a loose cannon. We don’t want to now hand it nuclear weapons that could destroy the entire industry.

Protect your health freedoms or you will lose them! The U.S. Congress is literally just one vote away from granting the FTC dangerous new powers to destroy the natural products industry. A vote could take place as early as this weekend.

Attorney Jonathan Emord had this to say about this issue:

“The provision removing the ban on FTC rulemaking without Congressional preapproval contained in H.R. 4173 invites the very same irresponsible over-regulation of the commercial marketplace that led Congress to enact the ban in the 1980s. FTC has no shortage of power to regulate deceptive advertising; this bill gives it far more discretionary power than it needs, inviting greater abuse and mischief from an agency that suffers virtually no check on its discretion.”

You need to see this video

I interviewed Jonathan Emord recently at the Health Freedom Expo in California. Watch Jonathan talk about global censorship of health freedom in this YouTube interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbJS…

I know the audio quality is a little poor (we were at the Health Freedom Expo, and there’s a lot of background noise), but Jonathan Emord’s words are so important for you to hear that I wanted to share this video with you anyway.

Jonathan Emord is also the author of an important new book called Global Censorship of Health Information (http://www.amazon.com/Global-Censor…). The book exposes the truth behind what Emord calls state-sponsored drug monopolies.

Click here to protect your health freedom now.

New ‘safety plan’ would control what you eat

New ‘safety plan’ would control what you eat

‘It is to our food what the bailout was to our economy, only we can live without money’


Posted: May 01, 2010
11:30 pm Eastern

By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Critics say a bill pending in the U.S. Senate would do for Americans’ food supply what “Obamacare” is doing to the nation’s supply of health-care resources.

And it’s generating a surge of alarm among small-farm operators and natural food advocates.

“S. 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the U.S.,” writes Steve Green on the Food Freedom blog. “It is to our food what the bailout was to our economy, only we can live without money.”

The plan is sponsored by U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., who explains the legislation “is a critical step toward equipping the FDA with the authorities and funding it needs to regulate what is now a global marketplace for food, drugs, devices, and cosmetics.”

Now it’s statism on our plate! Mark Levin’s manifesto – ‘Liberty and Tyranny’ – provides the antidote to its growing stranglehold

His website explains, “The legislation requires foreign and domestic food facilities to have safety plans in place to prevent food hazards before they occur, increases the frequency of inspections. Additionally, it provides strong, flexible enforcement tools, including mandatory recall. Most importantly, this bill generates the resources to support FDA food safety activities.”

 

The proposal, which was cleared by the U.S. House last year but has been languishing in the Senate because of a full calendar of projects, creates a long list of new requirements for food-producing entities to meet the demands of the Secretary of Agriculture. It is expected to be the subject of discussion in coming days.

According to a summary of the proposal, it “requires annual registration of food facilities, including food facilities that export foot.” It also sets up a suspension of registration for any “food facility” breaking any Health and Human Services rule, creates an annual fee for registration and gives bureaucratic oversight of many operations.

One such proposal, the summary explains, is to require federal officials “to establish a tracing system for food that is located in the United States or is for import into the United States that enables the Secretary to quickly identify each person who grows, produces, manufactures, processes, packs, transports, holds, or sells such food.”

While it includes an exemption for food “produced on a farm,” the absence of further definition is leaving many wondering whether they will be monitored if they pick strawberries, make jam and sell it at a farmers market.

Green’s analysis quoted Shiv Chopra, a Canada Health whistleblower, who concluded S. 510 “would preclude the public’s right to grow, own, trade, transport, share, feed and eat each and every food that nature makes.”

Does your doctor really know best? Get this straight-forward examination of how to make sure you feel your best every day!

Bill Heid, chief of Solutions from Science, a marketer for survival seeds and information on processes to reduce reliance on a supermarket chain, cited a number of concerns.

First, he said, the new layers of regulations will drive up prices. No producer, he said, can afford to expand massively the expense of meeting government requirements without paying for it, and that would have to be passed on to the customers.

Second, he is concerned about the application of laws designed for corporate entities to the local producer: What about Iowa children who want to sell ears of corn at a farmers market or alongside the road?

Further, he said, the plan probably would raise the danger to consumers, because manylocal suppliers would be forced out of business, and his or her customers would be forced to rely on the corporate supply chains.

“What they’re going to do is end up making it unsafe,” Heid said.

He tells people their best defense against contaminated products is to grow their own or buy it from someone they know.

According to a report at Oregon Rural Action, which urged consumers to contact their members of Congress on the issue, the “one-size-fits-all” concept isn’t workable.

“S. 510 is a well-meaning attempt to address the genuine problems of contamination from food-borne pathogens and complications in prevention and intervention caused by large, industrialized food distribution systems,” the group said.

“All of the well-publicized incidents of contamination in recent years – spinach, peppers, peanuts, hamburger – occurred in industrialized food supply chains that span national and even international boundaries. Food safety is a priority shared by all. It is not compromised by the growing trend toward healthy, fresh, locally sourced vegetables

, meats, fruits, dairy and small processing firms reinvigorating local food systems. Local food systems are inherently safer and traceable,” the group said.

While the group said some definitions that would protect small operations apparently are in the works, the possibility remains of standards even for “small, direct market farmers.”

The bill opponents say it brings the “complex and burdensome” Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point system “to even the smallet local processors.”

“Applying a HACCP system to newly emerging local foods facilities processing for local markets as well as to direct market farmers adding value to their products may undermine and extinguish these emerging small businesses attempting to bring fresh, local foods to the American table,” the analysis said.

The Daily Paul, which dedicates itself to restoring constitutional government, warned the proposal also would undermine the public’s access to dietary supplements.

At Citizens For Health, the bill’s expansion of government authority and bureacracy was condemned.

“If passed, the law would charge facilities an annual $500 registration fee, require redundant record keeping, and expand the FDA’s authority to quarantine geographic areas for alleged food safety problems – all without significantly improving food safety.”

The Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance warned, “As it is currently written, S. 510 will actually make our food less safe. S. 510 will strengthen the forces that have led to the consolidation of our food supply in the hands of a few industrial food producers.”