Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She is the most fit first lady in years. Laura and Barbara were no where as fit as Michele. Hillary wasn't either. And sorry, she does have killer arms. And yes they do show definition. Why do you think women wanted her arms, myself included lol And all presidents have personal chefs. And there is nothing wrong with having a personal trainer. I'm not sure what you are getting at.
Lol.....if that's your idea of "killer arms", you've got a pretty low bar. While she is the most fit first lady in years -- despite the fact that she's actually not that fit -- that's actually not much of an accomplishment.
You and I likely have drastically different interpretations of fit. I would fire both my personal chef and trainer if that's the best I looked after 5+ years. There's nothing wrong with having either a chef or a personal trainer, but you should get MUCH better results if you have both. There are three key parts to fitness: nutrition, exercise, and sleep, and it would appear she's not maximizing her returns on the first two.
Michelle is likely an endomorph (someone who struggles with their weight, and tends to have a large body with curves), but there are diets and workout plans that help with that. I don't see that at work here. That's why people roll their eyes when she delivers a nutrition "mandate" like the ones she did with school lunches. I'm wiling to bet she has a minimal -- likely VERY minimal -- understanding of the relationship between macronutrient ratios, the timing of those macronutrients, and their role in weight gain/loss. And I don't think her understanding of micronutrients is much better.
^^Oh, come on! This comment, and this whole conversation, shows how the RW just hates Michelle Obama. If Michelle's "cause" were literacy, the RW crowd would be saying the same thing, e.g. literacy is none of her business, who is she to tell people to read, and anyway, she's fat, with lousy arms, blah, blah, blah!
^^Oh, come on! This comment, and this whole conversation, shows how the RW just hates Michelle Obama. If Michelle's "cause" were literacy, the RW crowd would be saying the same thing, e.g. literacy is none of her business, who is she to tell people to read, and anyway, she's fat, with lousy arms, blah, blah, blah!
Stick with the facts, please. You're trying to make this into a RW vs LW thing, and it's not.
Nobody said she has "lousy arms". Perhaps the dumbing down of America has seeped into the fitness world, and what was once "slightly better than average arms" now pass for "killer arms"....lol. And, clinically, she's closer to fat than she is fit, purely by BF%.
This is something in this thread that people just do not understand....parental responsibility....
So sad....
You're trying to turn this into a parental responsibility issue when it's not. The school lunch program has existed in some form since the 1940s. A lot of posters on here have eaten school lunches themselves, and bought school lunches for their kids. There have always been nutrition guidelines for the school lunches.
Furthermore, though though this is Michelle Obama's pet issue, she did not make these changes.
Furthermore, though though this is Michelle Obama's pet issue, she did not make these changes.
Through the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act championed by the First Lady and signed by President Obama, USDA made the first major changes in school meals in 15 years, which will help us raise a healthier generation of children.
Through the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act championed by the First Lady and signed by President Obama, USDA made the first major changes in school meals in 15 years, which will help us raise a healthier generation of children.
I had lunch duty yesterday and watched students throw out whole oranges/unopened cups of peaches.
They don't have a choice not to take them when they go through the line.
The USDA is spending all this money and showing you the trays of healthy food.
What you don't see is what fills the trash cans at the end of lunch period
Sure it's only one school but I'd wager this is going on in school cafeterias all over the nation.
I'm all for healthy choices but in this case there's no choice.
Let the students chose the fruit if they want.
Putting it on their tray only to have them throw it out isn't solving anything.
I had lunch duty yesterday and watched students throw out whole oranges/unopened cups of peaches.
They don't have a choice not to take them when they go through the line.
The USDA is spending all this money and showing you the trays of healthy food.
What you don't see is what fills the trash cans at the end of lunch period
Sure it's only one school but I'd wager this is going on in school cafeterias all over the nation.
I'm all for healthy choices but in this case there's no choice.
Let the students chose the fruit if they want.
Putting it on their tray only to have them throw it out isn't solving anything.
Then it is up to (again) the parents to see that the kids don't go out and spend their money buying black market candy and sweets.
But even if they are throwing away the more healthy food, it is still better than having a school meal program that purposely feeds them junk.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
