Obama hits the V

[GeorgiaLakeSearch]

Originally Posted by JPD

Very weak response. If it were on topic, I would have said nothing.

Only weak because you do not agree.

You know it is true. If Swampbuck was raving about Obama you would have been fine.

[SWAMPBUCK62]

Originally Posted by JPD

What does this blather have to do with the topic, or with Atlanta? Take this garbage to the politics forum.

the sack of crap rides down the street in his limo and the great unwashed throw their panties at him it's sickening... He works for us , not the other way around...the thread is about Barry how can that not get political?

[JPD]

Originally Posted by GeorgiaLakeSearch

And First Lady Michelle Obama's weight loss program is just another nanny state idea.

Perhaps you should read the preamble to the constitution. Here, I'll make it easy for you:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Promoting healthy eating in a time of rampant obesity would seem to me to be a perfectly valid way to promote the general welfare. You have the freedom to disagree, but it's stated in plain english in the first sentence of our constitution.

[Iconographer]

Originally Posted by JPD

Perhaps you should read the preamble to the constitution. Here, I'll make it easy for you:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Promoting healthy eating in a time of rampant obesity would seem to me to be a perfectly valid way to promote the general welfare. You have the freedom to disagree, but it's stated in plain english in the first sentence of our constitution.

And boy, have they run with that phrase. I'm pretty sure the Framers didn't have this in mind.

[Mutiny77]

Originally Posted by LovinDecatur

And boy, have they run with that phrase. I'm pretty sure the Framers didn't have this in mind.

Conceptually, it's very much in line with what's stated in the Constitution. If you're arguing about specifics, there's absolutely no way they could foresee every single issue that might arise centuries into the future. Arresting the obesity epidemic is a public health mandate that's very much within the domain of the federal government for regulation purposes. As a matter of fact, I can't think of anything that's more in the spirit of that statement.

[Box]

Originally Posted by LovinDecatur

And boy, have they run with that phrase. I'm pretty sure the Framers didn't have this in mind.

Then how come Thomas Paine urged out country, to pay "four pounds a year for every child under fourteen years of age; enjoining the parents of such children to send them to school, to learn reading, writing, and common arithmetic; the ministers of every parish, of every denomination to certify jointly to an office, for that purpose, that this duty is performed. The amount of this expense will be, For six hundred and thirty thousand children at four pounds per annum each £2,520,000"

Also,

"To pay to every such person of the age of fifty years, and until he shall arrive at the age of sixty, the sum of six pounds per annum out of the surplus taxes, and ten pounds per annum during life after the age of sixty"

[Onthemove2014]

Originally Posted by LovinDecatur

And boy, have they run with that phrase. I'm pretty sure the Framers didn't have this in mind.

Oh come on. It's common knowledge that our country is fat as hell and its killing us.
The government subsidizing corn is the biggest culprit. Who on earth is going to our educate people to not be the lard-a$ses of the world?