Well that's just it isn't it.

We need the government to tell us what to eat.

We need the government to tell us what kind of health insurance to have.

We need the government to tell us what can be posted on line with "Net Neutrality".

We need the government to tell us what kind of light bulbs we can use.

We need the government to tell us how to educate our children by eliminating voucher programs.

Sigh.

We need to tell the government to get lost.

I don't see a cold beer or a glass of wine on there. That's whats missing!!

There's no section for bacon.

"What's wrong with this picture?"

It spoils My appetite for starters..

Myplate followed by the obese surgeon general and the wookie with the gargantuan caboose. You can tell by chewbacca's under bite that her lower jaw dislocates in order to down multiple items at those secret jaunts to BBQ joints & McDonald's.

More do as I say, while I do as I damn well please and the taxpayer pays for it. Gotta get my reparations while I can.

You can have my burger when you pry it from my cold dead hand.

Steve H: ya gotta translate fruits for wine and grains for beer. Now if you make your vodka from potatoes, you are all set.

Just remember Rick, "One size fits all". Next we'll all get fitted out with Mao suits.

As usual, they get it completely wrong with an overemphasis on carbs and no mention of healthy fats whatsoever. That plate is a recipe for obesity and type 2 diabetes. Absolutely moronic.

I don't know about anyone else, but whenever I see the Wookie, I hear the theme song to "The Jeffersons" in my head...

That plate is a recipe for obesity and type 2 diabetes. Absolutely moronic.

The White House will be ordering those Mao suits in extra large.

Once Barry gets the hyperinflation going he will be able to institute food rationing that will mandate everyone eating according the the federally approved meal plan.

Soylent Red and Soylent Blue are both there, but I see an over emphasis on Soylent green...and they are always running out of Soylent Green

Where do 2 chili dogs, a side of fries, and an extra side of chili fit on that plate, Barry?

What's wrong with this picture is your laughable compulsion to find something wrong with every little thing just because it occurs during this administration.

The food plate is the latest incarnation of the food pyramid. The food pyramid, you'll clearly be surprised to learn, was adopted by the USDA in 1992 under Bush Sr., Republican. Nanny state!

It was adapted from guidelines published by Denmark. Bush Sr. was clearly a socialist!

The food pyramid was replaced by MyPyramid in 2005, under Bush Jr., Republican. And yes, it was promoted at MyPyramid.gov. How dare O bureacracy tell us what to eat!

Oh, wait. None of those reactions actually happened. You were apparently saving them up to blow a gasket on Obama.

With the expanding previously unknown, drug resistant, and deadly E. Coli casualty list coming from Europe with a few cases reported in the U.S., Mrs. Obama wants me to eat more vegetables. I'll stick with my butter and bacon, thank you very much.

The food plate is the latest incarnation of the food pyramid. The food pyramid, you'll clearly be surprised to learn, was adopted by the USDA in 1992 under Bush Sr., Republican. Nanny state!

It was adapted from guidelines published by Denmark. Bush Sr. was clearly a socialist!

The food pyramid was replaced by MyPyramid in 2005, under Bush Jr., Republican. And yes, it was promoted at MyPyramid.gov. How dare O bureacracy tell us what to eat!

MYPYRAMID! Bush Jr promoted MYPRYAMID? lol

Hey government, choose my plate. Pick what it is I should eat. And as an extension, ensure that I don't eat that which you dear Nanny State believes I should not. I give my 'freedom of choice' to you O Bureacracy, O You Who Knows Best. I give to you my trust in your wisdom to discern what is best for me. I give to you my liberty.

What a solid gold asshat.

John,

So what you are really saying is that the hullabaloo over M. Obama's food initiative is just a big sham and represents nothing new at all. Thanks for pointing that out.

Yes, it is nanny statism.

The food pyramid sucked too. Big time. Happy now? This was a missed opportunity to get it right based on the latest, best available information pertaining to diet and obesity. Government got it wrong. Again. This is particularly damning, since Michelle gives lip service to solving the "obesity epidemic." Statists keep telling us how the government is going to solve all our problems, yet somehow they keep disappointing.

You must be omniscient and omnipresent, John, like Obama. Since you are aware of all the "reactions" that have or have not happened in decades past. Amazing.

There sure are a lot of voodoo incarnations going on in this Kenyan clowns administration.

The circles I run in have been condemning the food pyramid for years. Most notably, men like Gary Taubes.

The history of the food pyramid, sans BDS:

In 1967, CBS aired a documentary on TV, Hunger in America which reported the extent of hunger and malnutrition among low income groups in the United States. This show galvanized the American people into demanding the expansion of federal food assistance programs. In 1968, the Senate appointed Senator George McGovern to chair the "Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs" with the goal of wiping out hunger and malnutrition in the US.

By 1969, the committee had succeeded in wiping out malnutrition, and wanting to secure further funding, it began prying into other areas of health and nutrition.

McGovern and several members of his staff had become familiar with the Ancel Keys' influence on the American Heart Association, which was proposing that fat and cholesterol consumption should be lowered for better heart health, even though the link between the two had never been proven in any scientific study. With this focus, the creation of today's USDA Food Pyramid began.

Government uber alles

dbarrett1@myfastmail.com

So what you are really saying is that the hullabaloo over M. Obama's food initiative is just a big sham and represents nothing new at all. Thanks for pointing that out.

I often wonder what makes someone like you go to such lengths to intentionally portray themselves as obtuse. Are you so determined to criticize the opposition that you relish making yourself look stupid just to do so?

My apologies and condolences if it was not actually intentional. It's just that I don't see how someone with literacy skills such as yours would conflate the act of proposing new nutritional guidelines with the content of the guidelines themselves. It would be like saying the hullabaloo over Bush's tax cuts was just a big sham and represented nothing new at all, because you know, Reagan proposed tax cuts too.

The food pyramid sucked too. Big time. Happy now?

I wouldn't say "happy". More like "entertained". You see, I feel that way whenever someone pulls out the "even though we didn't say anything at the time, that thing we're criticizing about the Democrat we also secretly thought was bad when the Republican did it... honest, believe us!" argument.

This was a missed opportunity to get it right based on the latest, best available information pertaining to diet and obesity.

Ah, the beginnings of a actual argument! If you have commentary on the nutritional implication of the guidelines, rather than the political implication, I'm sure we're all interested to see.

This, by the way, was exactly the criticism that the Harvard School of Public Health levied against Bush Jr.'s MyPyramid. They, however, actually revealed their criticism at the time, rather than waiting until a Democrat changed it to announce their criticism retroactively.

You must be omniscient and omnipresent, John, like Obama. Since you are aware of all the "reactions" that have or have not happened in decades past.

Ah, more entertainment with the "I can't dispute what you said, but I'll try to make it look inaccurate by noting that it's possible that a counterexample exists that no one is aware of" argument. By your logic, any of your nutritional criticism of the new guidelines should also be dismissed, since you do not have god-like knowledge of that topic.

The USDA has been working on dietary guidelines for nearly a century:
http://iml.jou.ufl.edu/projects/Fall02/Greene/history.htm

John wants to get sidetracked in a little game of "when did the bureaucracy act under a GOP president". It isn't a question of when it started. It is a question of the current intent.

The current intent is a President and his pushy first lady (first wookie?) are declaring that they know better than everyone else what dietary choices we should all be making. They do this while hypocritically doing exactly what they want to forbid the rest of us from doing.

It isn't about the recommendations The government can recommend whatever it likes (although there is ample reason to consider that those recommendations really are a recipe for obesity as was suggested earlier). It's about a coercive government that issues recommendations and then uses the bureaucracy to force adherence to them. Banning certain foods as dangerous in schools while they still serve them at the White House.

It's about the hypocrisy, John, but then being a liberal hypocrite yourself you are probably too close to see it.

I don't see how someone with literacy skills such as yours would conflate the act of proposing new nutritional guidelines with the content of the guidelines themselves.

I won't bother to address the other spurious assertions. They're too shallow to matter. I'll just say, huh? Maybe this makes sense in your head. As literate as I am, I have no idea what this means. I suppose I would "conflate" the act of writing a book with the book's content. I fail to see a lack of consistency.

This article is about Michelle Obama unveiling "New Nutritional Guidlines."

The content of which I somehow conflated.

Taxpayers PAID over $2 million for the pictured design.

It seems to me if they were going to do this, they could have had a contest for students to come up with a design, with a small prize and scholarship, and ended up with a better design for less.

But, hey, it's only other people's money . . .

Johnny, Johnny, where do I start?

When GW Bush was spending too much money during the final two years of his administration, conservatives parted company with him. When GW Bush tried to push through Immigration Reform w/Amnestry, conservatives were very vocal and pissed off at him.

Then there is you and your liberal ilk. Who never fault or call out their leadership. With you it is party first, country second. With conservatives it is the other way around. ww

Ha ha ha. I just noticed this quote in the article I linked praising Obama's nutritional guidelines.

"What I do advocate for is the notion that we can remove guilt and shame from food decisions and make eating a pleasurable and healthful experience. One key strategy is to recognize that there are no good foods or bad foods, only foods for different purposes -- some are pleasurable, some are healthful, and many are a combination of both."

I suppose if one is a "food relativist" any standards at all are unnecessary. Why bother? lol. This is the sort of mindless drivel typical of the left.

"If it feels good, eat it."

LoL.

Could someone explain why some people here (and presumably elsewhere) refer to Michelle Obama as a "wookie"? Is it because she's taller than average (though not freakishly so)? Is she handy with a bow-caster?

hyper: I don't appreciate it either. Don't think it's funny or appropriate.