The Nanny State vs. the Childhood Obesity Epidemic

Despite the Nanny State label, this is probably a good thing. That being said, our descent into idiocracy is only hastened when government abdicate parents of their responsibilities. Mom & Dad are too slovenly to feed the kids anything other than Doritos and McDonalds? Clearly the problem is… Doritos and McDonalds.

“For the first time, the nation will have goals, benchmarks, and measurable outcomes that will help us tackle the childhood obesity epidemic one child, one family, and one community at a time,” Obama says in a news release.U.S. kids haven't always been obese. Only one in 20 children ages 2 to 19 was obese in the 1970s. But around 1980 child obesity began to rocket to today's stratospheric level: Nearly one in three kids is overweight or obese, and nearly one in five is frankly obese.

via Michelle Obama’s Plan to End Childhood Obesity Epidemic.

4 thoughts on “The Nanny State vs. the Childhood Obesity Epidemic

  1. How about the government gets out of our kitchens and bedrooms? Maybe we should put track and field back into the schools. Can’t do that because one kid will win and everyone else will lose, and that means one kid is superior to all the others, and that doesn’t fit into the socialists idea that everyone is equal and needs to suffer equally.

  2. Hunter were you the bully or bullied in school? What kind of a comment is that?

    …that means one kid is superior to all the others, and that doesn’t fit into the socialists idea that everyone is equal and needs to suffer equally.

    Even helping your fellow man or discouraging bullying is socialism to people like you.

    Perhaps the gov’t would stay out of our kitchens if we were feeding our children right in the first place. Seeing the growing obesity problem with our kids and complications that go with that, it’s pretty clear that many of us don’t.

  3. Is it just a coincidence that the childhood obesity rates started skyrocketing in the 80′s right after the woman’s liberation movement? Because more women started working full-time jobs there was less time at home to prepare nutritious, well-balanced meals. I, of course, am not against women working. I just think that we need to look at a main, if not the main, cause of rampant childhood obesity.

  4. Well… some interesting opinions. I agree that a renewed emphasis on phys-ed in schools would better than trying to legislate what we eat. And/Or what if schools had to work within the constraints of a 100 mile diet in planning their meals?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>