Should the government mandate food intake or anything.

The difference of opinion identified below is really about government overreach.

On fat, Huckabee vs. Palin vs. Palin

Mike Huckabee came to First Lady Michelle Obama’s defense on her push for better childhood nutrition, saying “With all due respect to my colleague and friend Sarah Palin, I think she’s misunderstood what Michelle Obama is trying to do,” the former Arkansas governor said Tuesday on the “Curtis Sliwa Show.”

Palin had been critical of efforts like Let’s Move as an overreach, but it seems that in her 2009 state of the state address as governor she made a similar point:

    We have alarming levels of heart disease, diabetes, childhood obesity – and all of these maladies are on the rise. Now, I won’t stand here and lecture – for very long – but health care reform on an individual basis is often just this simple: we could save a lot of money, and a lot of grief, by making smarter choices.

    It starts by ending destructive habits, and beginning healthy habits in eating and exercise. In my case, it’s hard to slack when you have the ever-present example of an Iron Dogger nearby. But many of us could use a little more time in our great outdoors – and when you live in the Great Land, there’s no excuse.


It is Huckabee that misses the point. And comparing Palin’s recent statement to her earlier article also misses the point.

While the three of them agree that healthy eating is not only good for the individual but it can save the state a lot of money due to lowering health care costs.

But the larger point here and the one Palin is making, it that we have to wean ourselves away from the nanny state and take responsibility for ourselves. Do we look to the state to manage us or do we manage ourselves.

This issue permeates a great deal of legislation. As an example, the courts recently held that Obamacare was not constitutional in that it made it mandatory that individuals buy health insurance.

Another issue lurking in the background is that of liberty. Every government mandate restricts our freedom.

December 22, 2010 | 4 Comments »

Leave a Reply

4 Comments / 4 Comments

  1. More unfunded Federal mandates…
    More unfunded Federal mandates…
    More unfunded Federal mandates…
    More unfunded Federal mandates…
    More unfunded Federal mandates…

    Palin is right. Huckabee sees her as his major threat, and is trying to appeal to “moderate” voters. Menus are best prepared by moms, not politicians.

    Ron, I am obese but also have had foot trouble. Bones age; that seems to be the lot of all of us.

  2. The last thing we need is a nanny government. If people want to smoke and eat themselves to death, it’s their choice and a free one at that.

    There is no law againt being stupid.

    Unfortunately both can be an addiction. I know, I smoked for many years finally quiting over 35 years ago. Started at an early age beginning in high school and the nuns at our Catholic school permitted us to smoke on the premises. Back then it wasn’t a big deal.

    After I quit, I started to work out and began a career (over 25 years) of jogging. We used to do 25-30 miles a week. The reward is I am looking forward to a knee replacement and foot repair. My associates were likewise blessed with hip replacements, and assorted orthopedic surgery.

    We regretfully did not change our running shoes frequently enough and when the soles compress, nothing but your bones to absorb the shock.

    I should be thankful I quit smoking, it could have killed me.

  3. RandyTexas says:
    December 22, 2010 at 8:20 pm

    The issue is whether the government should force people to be healthier or if rather, people should be informed and then have the freedom to make their own decision.

    The latter. There are major problems either way. How can the US government’s funded public service messages be relied upon when the government is heavily (and I mean heavily) influenced by numerous food lobbies. Yes, there’s even a lobby for white cane sugar.

    Let the market influence diet. For example, want to renew your life insurance but you’ve gained 30 pounds since last year. That should cost you!

    Contrary to most media claims. obesity and smoking may reduce cost of health care and government payouts.

    It is not the goal of government to cut costs. When that becomes a goal, rather than a resulting benefit, the government will not be doing its job.

  4. The issue is whether the government should force people to be healthier or if rather, people should be informed and then have the freedom to make their own decision.

    Contrary to most media claims. obesity and smoking may reduce cost of health care and government payouts. If someone lives to be 100 they likely will collect SS and government benefits for decades. If someone dies at 60, it cuts long term care and as well, most of the money from all the years they paid into the system goes uncollected and is a bonus to the government coffers.