The Government is causing Obesity!

My buddy Flying Van is hostile towards school lunches. I believe he feels that the government is spending his money incorrectly. A point I am in agreement with.

The idea behind the lunch entitlement is that poor people can not afford to buy food or they care so little about the kids they have they choose not to feed them or they lack the training on how to purchase and prepare food. Seeing how kids are required to go to school, this makes it a logical place to feed these poor starving kids, who must be thinking about their empty stomachs instead of learning reading, writing and arithmetics.

That is to say your brain needs calories to function. Add to that the fact that hunger is a distraction and you have a prime example of the Government aiding education!

One of the primary problems with the above idea that people are starving. No doubt there are people in the US, who cannot access the cornucopia of goodness. If someone is starving the human thing to do is to get them fed, then have them to feed themselves. Finally have them help feed those who are starving.

So holding a parent responsible for providing for their child gets jettisoned. Having a community wanting to help the less fortunate is also jettisoned. And the chance of the child learning to feed themselves is shunted towards letting the government feed you.

Case in point: If you are on food stamps the USDA added incentives and other changes that targets the link between Obesity and Food Stamps with an idea to trim rampant obesity rates among low-income groups. Obesity is not caused by starvation... Right?

So we know that food stamps, from the government, are making poor people fat. Now I read that school lunches are not just making sure that hungry kid has sustenance to insure better performance. No our School lunch program, from the government, are making hungry kids Obese.

I never got\purchased school lunches. My mom made me a sandwich with some fruit and veg for quite a number of years. Sadly, many of those lunches were never eaten. Sometime around third grade I was responsible for my own lunch. Which means I had breakfast and dinner at home and ignored lunch. In HS I was on swim team and had instant breakfast (beats upchucking). Again, if I did have some lunch it was not everyday.

Basically, I was too lazy to make a lunch and too busy to bother with lunch. When I did eat, I made up for the missing meals. I did a pretty good job of burning off any extra calories as well.

Now my daughter needs to have regular intervals of food intake or she gets listless. My nephew would have to eat a certain nutritional balance to avoid nasty headaches.

To my way of thinking. Yes, we need to feed habitually hungry kids. The parents need to be held responsible or face some kind of consequence. Funding a Union does not seem to be covering the basic need.

Presidential appeals for bipartisanship means: do it my way!

There are a couple of disconnects between fact and fiction when it comes to congress. Republicans were an inferior minority in the senate until recently. Same with the House. Which means there is no way they can overcome a party line vote. In other words the Republicans, were rendered null and void in the bill passing process. Yet, I keep hearing at how they blocked legislation and Obama at every turn. Lets say your playing in the super bowl and you have a full healthy team. The other side (Republicans) have a two man squad and they are holding you to near zero yardage.

One would wonder what was up with the players and the coach.

This leads into the second disconnect. Bi-partisanship. You will hear liberal pendants say time and again how the Obama administration has tried time and time again to reach across the aisle an unprecedented number of attempts only to be shunned. While you hear the conservatives tell of being locked out of the process and not included. How can it be both?

Mark Knoller wrote about this very thing. The liberal idea of bi-partisanship is for the Republicans to do exactly what they say. Which, there is no real reason to support anything the Democrats are pushing. Unless, of course it is good for the people of this great nation.

Which really does not matter anyways as they do not have the votes to enact anything.

President Palin

Okay, so get this. There was a convention of the Tea Party which is for fiscal responsibility in government. Sarah Palin gave a great speech. This has caused the MSM to become unglued.

And the major unglued story I read today? She jotted some hand notes for the speech. There is something truly amazing about Sarah and her ability to drive liberals over the top nutzo.

She has unleashed some amazing unprecedented media responses from her Facebook postings. It seems to go like this. She issues a statement, the MSM gears up the attack team. People, most of whom are savvy to this hatred, figure out what she means and scoffs at the press. Sarah becomes more popular and the state run media is left scratching its head on what just happened.

The idea around these stories is that Sarah is unsophisticated and a "Dumb Hick". Most of us jott something down on our hands at some point. It is a smart thing to do, as you will not leave your hand on your desk when you need that info.

I suppose the more intellectually elite thing to do would be to set up a higher tech method of note cribbing. I mean, that would not look as silly right?

Kennedy

With the Senators passing there has been many newspaper pendents lionizing the Senator. Two more practical writings I read came from Daniel Hannan and Susan Estrich. They have different takes from that of the state controlled press.

As a Catholic Ted Kennedy's have always been a bit of an embarrassment, his stance on abortion and the entire Mary Jo Kopechne incident. Still I want to believe that the soul of Ted Kennedy will see God face to face. I desire this for every soul. I know not all will see God.

That said…

Do rules which apply to all Catholic apply to Sen. Kennedy? He has always seemed to be the Exception. Are there special rules in the Catholic Church for the Kennedy Clan?

Does canon law and liturgical law apply to the Kennedy Clan?

I have seen it written Pres. Obama is slated to give a eulogy during a Funeral Mass for the late Sen. Kennedy. The Rite of Christian Funerals 141 says: “A brief homily based on the readings is always given after the gospel reading at the funeral liturgy and may also be given after the readings at the vigil service; but there is never to be a eulogy.”

The 2000 GIRM 338 says: "At the funeral Mass there should as a rule be a short homily, but never a eulogy of any kind. The homily is also recommended at other Masses for the dead celebrated with a congregation."

Eulogies are inappropriate during a Catholic Funeral Mass. There is no given exclusion. Further, will the sight of the most aggressively pro-abortion President in history giving a eulogy, in a Catholic church… during a Mass… for the most aggressively pro-abortion Catholic Senator give scandal to the Catholic faithful?

This is a very difficult thing to see such a wanton disregard for a groups beliefs.

Much easier is the question of should Sen. Kennedy have a Catholic funeral?

Perhaps. It depends on whether he showed some adequate sign of repentance before his death. We have to be lenient on that point. Given what I have read of Sen. Kennedy’s last hours, I would not oppose this. It is disturbing, due to his decades long unrepentant support of abortion, and the scandal that caused. However, the Church’s law is very lenient. Thanks be to God.

Behind think of the Goodwins law..

"There is a trajectory of socialism, regardless of the good intentions of many socialists. As he framed it, you take things such as health care, things that are traditionally understood as within the ambit of individual liberty and free choice; you move such things into the ambit of state responsibility as the welfare state emerges and grows, on the theory that it is government’s responsibility to provide for everyone’s needs (by redistributing resources); as more things are moved from private to public control, the state by definition becomes totalitarian; and, inexorably, the totalitarian state gets bad leaders and the society comes to reflect the policy choices of those leaders."

Article excerpt by: Andrew C. McCarthy

"Our bureaucracy would certainly cause health care to result in rationing and euthanasia. There will be death of the innocents, just not on the same scale and not as evil of motive. Though in any case any form of euthanasia is intrinsically evil regardless of the intent of the "care-giver". One thing that most people don't realize is that it was American that often served to give advice to Nazi Germany when it came to eugenics. Some of the people that worked with Margaret Sanger and her Birth Control League and wrote for her magazine served as advisors to the Nazi regime. America at the time was on a eugenics kick and some of the laws since repealed are really disturbing."

Article excerpt by: The Curt Jester

The Latest round in the failed arguments for the Government take over of Healthcare seems to focus on the Morality of having the Government take on the Role of Nanny. With the current attempts to undermine discussion by envoking Racism and Hitler and Class Warefare. I thought the above two missives delve past the obvious shock value. I invite you to read them open minded and take from them what you will. Facts not Spin should rule the day.

At least I think that.

Bizzarro World?

I feel that I am living in Bizzarro world. There is so much weird stuff going on, and it sort of explains itself.

Lets start with Joe Bidens take on fiscal responsibility: “Now, people when I say that look at me and say, ‘What are you talking about, Joe? You’re telling me we have to go spend money to keep from going bankrupt?’”

Biden said. “The answer is yes, that's what I’m telling you.”

The push by Obama for the Government take over of health care was given a "no thanks" by the Mayo Clinic. Good luck finding that on the news. Then the Zogby polling (that seems to follow with workplace scuttlebutt), "By a 50-42 margin, Americans oppose the House of Representatives' bill introduced July 14".

This is a 1200 page bill that few have read and what is coming out is not sounding like reform.

I wonder if no confidence in the government doing anything efficently has to do with the failed pork filled stimulus and horridly corrupted TARP?

I'm sure of course with Health Care they will do everything better?

Walter Cronkite passed away and with the memorials and remembrances there is a strong attempt to re-write his Liberal Bias that was well known and documented.

There was quite a bit to reflect on Mr. Cronkite's career, being unbiased is not one of them.

Which brings up fallen comic Janeane Garofalo, with this Bizzarro quote "I mean there is almost no liberal outlet for news commentary or editorializing."

I guess, ABC, NBC, CNN, MSNBC are just too far Right for her?

Lastly,

I keep reading, from the left, how Fox News is a horridly biased media outlet that is extreme and it should be censored and pulled off the air.

How do you account for the popularity?

I turn off news items that are not-interesting or irksome and offensive. For broadcast news I am far more interested in my local stationl. Consider that the bulk of peoples do not really care about the political landscape. Most of the newswatching is to see what is happening outside our bubble.

FNC – 981,000 viewers

CNN – 573,000 viewers

MSNBC –343,000 viewers

CNBC – 179,000 viewers

Popularity is not a measure of quality, Longevity is! FNC has both. What is popular is mainstream.

(Note here, Rush Limbaugh has an audience between 14.25 million and 25 million)

Back to "cuts" not being cuts?

President Obama today released a list of 121 proposed program terminations and reductions at a savings of $17 billion.  This is a good thing, a nice first step towards some fiscal responsibility at the fed level.  

A couple of problems: Every Dollar we "save" is going into new spending. Congress already said yes to $1,086 billion on regular discretionary spending in FY 2010.  even if the entire $12.5 billion in discretionary spending cuts are enacted, the savings would automatically be plowed into other programs to maintain discretionary spending at that level. So its just moving money around and touting that as "savings".

Add to that the fact that $17 billion is 1/2 of 1% of the total FY 2010 budget. It is pretty much equal to the interest paid on the $787 Pork laden stimulus bill.

If Obama was serious about streamlining he would mandate that savings go towards Deficit reduction.  Next keep going through and cutting.  Unless of course  1/2 of 1% is the sum total of wasted government spending... (I don't think it is)

The next time someone spouts off that Obama "Inherited" the economy, kindly remind them that is Bullshit.  He RAN for president, so he had a choice.

Obama against?

This was said yesterday and it struck a solemn chord.

"President appears to be against three things, Life, our Liberties and the pursuit of happiness."

It was said in humor, I almost laughed.  Then the truth of it struck me.

Charles Krauthammer, telling it like it is. Taking it to the "Man"

Charles Krauthammer, columnest for The Washington Post, has done an excellent job eliminating bias and spin from the above linked artical.

While the rest of the MSM spouts and spins off propaganda on how wildly sucessful or most beloved, hallowed, President Obamas triumph in Europe has been, Mr. Krauthammer has gone right down the middle.

It has been up to Radio and the New media to fill in the information void the MSM is creating, seemingly deliberately, around, beloved, hallowed, President Obama. 

We the people should NOT have to work so hard just to get the basics, but like it or not, it's the reality.

Learning from History on Recession Fix

This is a very straight forward explination of why government bailouts and stimulus has never worked.

I am not sure if you have seen this excellent chastising of the British PM by Daniel Hannan.  It is very significant to the situation the USA is heading.  Further it shows a lack of strong conservative voices currently in our representatives. 

China to call US notes due?

This is of paramount concern. 

SHANGHAI - China is ``a little bit worried'' about the safety of all the American debt it holds,Premier Wen Jiabao said Friday.

``We have lent a huge amount of money to the United States. Of course we are concerned about the security of our assets and, to be honest, I am a little bit worried,'' Wen said at a news conference ending the annual meeting of National People's Congress, the country's top advisory body.

Wen called on Washington ``to honour its words and stay a credible country and ensure the safety of Chinese assets.''

With more and more debt being piled onto the US taxpayer, China is gaining tremendous leverage.  If they call for the US to pay back the debt...  Well, it would be bad.

LOL

Socialized Medicine

There are quite a few problems with Health care costs.  I do not see how Government intervention will make health care "Better" in any way shape or form.

I feel the main problems are the insurance companies, Tort Law and no consumer market controls.

Public wary of health reform trade-offs

This AP story makes me wonder what people think a socialized system is going to be like.

 Depending on how they go about this government takeover, it could introduce a whole new industry based on cash and carry healthcare.

Someone will open up an MRI shop you can come in and get scanned.  Cash only doctors as well. 

We could loose the ability to go to court against hospitals and doctors as well.

Good Republican news. Or is it?

Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss won a run-off election in Georgia on Tuesday. This means no open checkbook for President Obama.

That means the scant remaining republicans actually have a say in the process by a filibuster, or obstruction. An attempt is made to infinitely extend debate upon a proposal in order to delay the or completely prevent a vote. If you can get enough votes (sixty) you can stop a filibuster.

In one way, I am a tad bit relieved that some checks and balance exist on the other side of the aisle. On the other hand, if the liberals do get what they want, that could bring a huge swing to the right in the next two elections. (President Jindal anyone? President Palin?)

Catholic Church .vs. Obama

First off I am a practicing Catholic, in good standing with the Holy See in Rome. Long after Pres. Obama passes this mortal coil the Catholic Church will still be around.
The MSM has been squaring off the Church and our new president. The MSM is using interesting terms in describing Cardinal Staffords critique on President-Elect Barack Obama’s pro-abortion position. The reporting says it is a "scathing rant" and a "diatribe."

Umkay... Here is the audio from his speech.

A rant? A diatribe? Is there really anything new here? Obama and the Church strongly disagree on embryonic stem cell research, abortion rights and civil unions for gay couples. This this is pretty common knowledge (unless your Pelosi). I would not anticipate the Church to change stance on any of these topics anytime, Pres. Obama, being a politician may.

I feel these are very important moral arguments with harsh future implications that need to be stated and re-stated.

Civil Discourse at the highest level. CNN's 'story' is just vilification disguised as journalism.

And so it begins

Who would have thunk he would bring back slavery? Welcome to the new America.

---UPDATE---

Prez. Elect. Obama must have had them change the site (I wonder why?) now the 'required' is gone and the Students get $40.00 an hour for volunteering. This means 100 hours hits the $4000.00 cap which is applicable towards collage.

Stay tuned for more runs up the flagpole...

Rahm Emanuel Obama chief of staff?

This is interesting, I did a Google look-up to see what kind of people Pres. Obama will surround himself with. This is an newsweek excerpt about his first choice for Chief of Staff:

Certainly, there is nothing bland about Emanuel and never has been. Although he once won a summer scholarship with the Joffrey Ballet, he preferred the combat of politics. As a Democratic Party official, he once sent a pollster who was late delivering polling results a dead fish in a box. Old Clinton hands still laugh about the night after Bill Clinton won the 1992 presidential election. In his book, "The Thumpin': How Rahm Emanuel and the Democrats Learned to Be Ruthless and Ended the Republican Revolution," Chicago Tribune deputy Washington bureau chief Naftali Bendavid writes that, as about a score of them sat around a picnic table mushily declaring their love for one another, Emanuel picked up a knife and called out the names of different politicians who had "f–––ed us." After each name, Emanuel would cry out, "Dead man!"—and stab the knife into the table.

--Edited-- Turns out the first source I used was altered. This is a better link with better info.