Tag Archives: Nudge

Whatever Happened to ‘They’re Gonna Do it Anyway?’

tumblr_mctd62n0101r3y2nqo1_1280Originally posted at American Thinker blog

Rest assured that if Americans are participating in an activity that liberals applaud, encouragement and financial facilitation are certain. However, if the uncooperative citizenry tends toward an activity that the left condemns, guilt, denunciation, and rebuke commence, and monitoring, restriction, and regulations follow.

Generally, if it involves the lusty side of human nature, liberals believe that self-control is an attribute most individuals lack. Ask anyone on the left why condoms should be made available to schoolchildren and standard answer is “They’re gonna to do it anyway.”

By and large, when it comes to sensual delights, Democrats tend to argue that nothing can be done to alter a person’s drive to satiate that primal urge. If hormones are raging, liberals are convinced that free birth control should be made available without limit. If prophylactic precautionary measures fail, government-funded abortion should be there to rectify inconvenient situations.

As a group, progressives seem to be convinced that the human libido is so intense that it overpowers free will. So, rather than discourage immoral behavior, to ensure “safe sex” and to save lives, they prod government to facilitate promiscuity at taxpayers’ expense.

Enabling heroin enthusiasts to avoid HIV and Hepatitis C with clean needle programs is another thing the left champions. As for marijuana, many ganja-loving liberals believe legalization is a great idea because not only are they “gonna to do it anyway,” but “everybody’s doing it,” so why miss out on the fun?

What’s confusing about this attitude is that the “They’re gonna to do it anyway” mantra does not apply to things like eating food and owning firearms, two activities leftists love to police.

Think about it. Who can name a more “They’re gonna to do it anyway” activity than eating? Eating is so much a part of our lives that at a minimum most of us eat at least three times a day which, for anyone other than Bill Clinton, is more than can be said about sex.

Michelle Obama, who’d probably support providing minors with birth control and dopers with needles, is busily swapping out candy for carrot sticks in vending machines. The first lady is totally convinced that nagging reins in appetite. However, the nudge approach seems to lack common sense, because if sexual impulses are impossible to regulate, how do you control a survival instinct like eating?

Don’t try to answer that question; liberals don’t make sense because they always attempt to have it both ways. Someone should inform progressives that, regardless of the pursuit, either human craving can be harnessed, or it’s pretty much impossible to force anyone to do anything against their will.

At present, freewheeling condom cheerleaders have turned their attention toward gun violence. The same people who declare that beginning at age 13 a person’s sex drive has a mind of its own also believe that violent lunatics hell-bent on chaos can have their impulses thwarted simply by limiting the types of weapons available to sane people.

If it is impossible to curtail sexual behavior in normal folks, how can hiding guns from the mentally ill affect irrational behavior? If the left’s condom logic were to be applied to the Second Amendment, gun lovers could get unlimited access to firearms. Then, in order to ensure public safety, someone would have to invent a condom specifically for guns.

In all seriousness, the misguided notion that gun control will curb violence makes almost as much sense as Michelle Obama believing that supervising food choices will convince high school athletes that they can survive on quinoa and sautéed spinach. Just because the Twinkies are no longer on school premises doesn’t mean that 250-pound football players are going to submit and agree to survive on 800 calories a day. Rest assured, neither will psychotics be deterred from murder and mayhem if that’s their aspiration.

Thus, once again, liberal contradiction proves that attempting to constrain truly uncontrollable people keeps no one safe and places unnecessary restrictions on everyone else.

Therefore, as the gun control debate heats up, Americans should note the liberal paradox that approves of granting irresponsible children the ability to exercise absolute free will in matters of the flesh, but wants to give government the role of ultimate micromanager in areas that affect responsible adults.

Michelle Touts Mother’s Milk

Originally posted at American Thinker blog

In conjunction with the IRS, and in the name of “choice,” the First Lady of the United States is presently “throwing the spotlight on nursing as a way to reduce childhood obesity.” Thanks to Michelle Obama and her “Let’s Moo-ve” campaign, the whir of a breast pump can now put tax rebates in the pocket of women who, in lieu of aborting offspring, choose instead to breastfeed.

The Obamas have managed to wriggle their way into America’s pocketbooks, healthcare, and grocery carts, and now, as soon as a newborn is placed in its mother’s arms, while IRS agents are out tracking nursing bras and tubes of lanolin Michelle will be right there dictating the benefits of mother’s milk.

Maybe Michelle can avoid spreading herself too thin by mandating that soon-to-be-government-run hospitals replace overhead delivery room mirrors with public service announcements instructing women on the delivery table to promptly begin nursing.

It’s surprising that Mrs. Obama is suddenly concerned with the well being of newborns. In a 2004 fundraising letter, Michelle warned supporters of the “rise of conservatism in this country, especially as it relates to women.”  At the time, conservatives were trying to ban partial-birth abortion. Michelle’s big fear was that women wouldn’t be able to kill a full-term baby and that the right to privacy would be violated by the “Justice Department’s request for hospitals to turn over the private medical records of dozens of patients.”

The abortion/breastfeeding advocate spouse of a President who wants to put medical records online while simultaneously demanding access to an Internet kill switch was adamant about “the right to choose … privacy rights…pay equity… ending domestic violence, promoting health care around the world, and letting doctors decide treatment options, not federal judges.”

Six years later, with Barack in charge, revisions to that list include the deletion of “letting doctors decide treatment options” and penciled in are the benefits of breast milk.

Just as she became an authority on food choices by denying dessert to her own children, Mrs. Obama has “spoken in public about nursing her youngest daughter, Sasha,” which obviously qualifies her to assume the role of the government’s chief lactation specialist.

One thing’s for sure — Michelle is a self-appointed authority on everything from where to find the best barbeque to executing perfect Indian dance steps, which makes it difficult for her to “tread carefully in what might be a sensitive area for some women — and not use her bully pulpit to directly ask more women to breast feed.”

Instead, Michelle has decided to “nudge” mothers toward choosing government-issued breast pumps. Kristina Schake, Mrs. Obama’s communications chief, said “Breastfeeding is a very personal choice for every woman.” Thus, “we,” as in mammary management teams, “are trying to make it easier” for those who choose to nurse to do so by passing federal legislation that compels businesses to provide accommodations for working women to pump breast milk or nurse at work.

Moreover, Michelle is deeply troubled that “only 3 percent of births occur at U.S. hospitals with a ‘Baby Friendly’ designation.”  To address the inequity, Mrs. Obama is teaming up with other pro-choice organizations like UNICEF to “push more hospitals” who, when not administering government-funded abortions in one room, will oversee certified pro-breastfeeding/”Baby Friendly” zones across the hall.

Michelle Obama apparently believes government intervention is needed to foster maternal/newborn bonding.  Coming from anyone else, parenting advice might be minimally appreciated, but having the wife of a president who opposed the Born Alive Act counseling women on newborn care is a tad hypocritical.  Is infant nourishment suddenly a concern for woman whose husband voted to deny medical care, warmth, and hydration to babies who would otherwise thrive after surviving a failed abortion?

Killing babies in the womb or, if necessary, with their heads sticking halfway out of the womb, is a right Michelle believes should be constitutionally upheld.  If the baby happens to make it out alive, the First Lady converts to Mommy mode and laments the tragedy that “especially in the black community — 40 percent of [the] babies never get breastfed at all, even in the first weeks of life.” According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “breastfeeding rates are low among African-American mothers compared to other racial and ethnic groups.”

Michelle should consider the fact that Barack’s pro-choice policies prevent millions of black babies from being born, let alone nursed.

In New York City alone, 60% of all African-American never-to-be-nursed babies are systematically aborted. Maybe the Dilettante of Data, while out saving lives by way of breastfeeding, could address the dire statistic that abortion is the leading killer of African-Americans in New York City and that since 1973 “black women’s share of abortions has consistently been at least twice their share of live births.”

Nevertheless, as long as “touch points in a child’s life” do not include any of the time from conception to birth, Mrs. Obama strongly supports informing the public that when it comes to breastfeeding and preventing childhood issues such as obesity, “early intervention is key” – just ask Planned Parenthood.

So as Michelle Obama continues to address the welfare of America’s children, what could be better than a First Lady who is able to balance infanticide and breastfeeding in perfect tandem? By deploying IRS agents to monitor prolactin levels and wet nurses to attend to babies whose mothers have a low milk supply, Michelle Obama will not only be addressing childhood obesity, she’ll be singlehandedly creating jobs.

Consequently, the Obama big-government teat will be jammed even further down the throats of American businesses, who will be forced to accommodate nursing mothers by a federal bureaucracy represented by a First Lady who, when not advocating for partial-birth abortion, spends time teaching the motherly art of latching on.

Michelle the Menu Maven

Originally posted at American Thinker blog

The woman who’s taste-tested every flavor of ice cream from Maine to Spain is out dictating gastronomical edicts to the National Restaurant Association.  With the help of Cass Sunstein, the First Lady of BBQ has decided to “nudge” Americans towards what she thinks kids should be eating because, God knows, parents and restaurateurs haven’t a clue.

The same woman who ordered hot fudge sundaes while eating her way across the North and Southeast of America is now “plead[ing] with restaurants to take a little butter or cream out of their dishes, use low fat milk and provide apple slices or carrots as a default side dish on the kids’ menu.”  One can’t help but wonder whether Sasha would have agreed to being prodded toward carrot-flavored frozen skim milk in lieu of the “melon and raspberry” ice cream concoction Mom purchased for her on the notorious Spanish “private mother-daughter” trip.

Part time nutritionist, full time First Lady Michelle believes restaurants need to “rethink the food they offer and reformulate their menus to help combat childhood obesity.”  Wonder if Michelle felt led to speak to the chef at Stewsman’s Lobster Pound, in Bar Harbor, Maine, about revising the menu. It was at the “Pound” that Michelle and Barry scarfed cholesterol-laden crustaceans while the girls devoured baskets of shrimp, which the menu described as “locally netted …cooked up crispy with Cole slaw, French fries and tartar sauce.”

Home from Martha’s Vineyard, where the family dined at the Beach Plum Inn, Sweet Life Cafe, and State Road Restaurant, none of which is renowned for diet fare, Mrs. Obama removed her epicurean connoisseur bonnet and replaced it with a dietician/lecturer’s cap.  Speaking in collective terms, the First Lady urged restaurateurs and executives to control food choices, saying “We have to do more, we have to go farther, and we need your help to lead this effort.”

In the past, the First Lady delivered “similar messages as part of her effort to boost childhood nutrition.”  Michelle successfully browbeat the restaurant industry into believing “parents’ choices at restaurants need to be easier, and healthy options shouldn’t be buried on the menu” under the fried shrimp baskets.

Michelle not only “appealed to the industry’s creativeness to get the job done,” but put the burden on restaurants to maintain family harmony by saying, “You know what gets them to drive their poor parents crazy because they just have to have something.”  In other words, do what you have to do to make lima beans taste like Rice Krispies Treats®.

According to Michelle, restaurants such as those frequented by the first family are often thought of as the worst offenders in terms of nourishment.  Yet the Obamas trawl ice cream parlors, chocolatiers, and the Magnolia Bakery, and eagerly sample spareribs at places like 12 Bones Smokehouse in Ashville, North Carolina.

After enduring the First Lady’s harangue, submissive executives agreed to “rethink their menus” with a mind to reconfigure offerings to be even more boring than eating at home, which should do wonders for the restaurant business.

America can also say goodbye to IHOP’s famous chocolate-chip pancakes, topped with powdered sugar and whipped cream. IHOP president, Jean Birch, said her company “will soon be coming out with a new children’s menu,” which plans to propel the unwilling toward fruit as “the default side.”  Birch said the “aim is for parents not to have to argue with kids to get them to order healthier items.” Problem solved! Just remove from the Carte du jour everything except that which bears the Michelle Obama official stamp of approval.

Nanny State digging into kid’s lunch boxes – American Thinker Blog – February 9, 2010

Originally posted at American Thinker

One highlight for this first grade St. Robert Bellarmine Elementary School student was the Wednesday afternoon candy-drive.  Once a week, Sister Marie Rose Christianson allowed disheveled kids in brown uniforms and crooked clip-on ties entry into our classroom to sell penny candy.

On the sly my grandmother would pass me a few cents from the linty pocket of her apron giving me access to a little bit of Catholic School candy heaven.

In fact, 40+ years later I can still remember the aroma of the thick strings of warm red licorice.  Believe me, it smelled nothing like the institutional cafeteria wafting with the fetid odors of sweaty kids, bologna sandwiches, rotten fruit and warm milk.

Thinking back I’m convinced hot cocoa and bagels ferried me through high school.  Academically, I was less than mediocre.  In fact I still wonder how I managed to graduate.   The whole event is a blur save olfactory memories of warm peanut butter cookies and cheap pizza.  Unhealthy school lunch choices and truant officers kept me coming back for more.

Being a kid in the 60’s and 70’s offered benefits students in 2010 lack.  How depressing to learn, “the Obama administration is expected to unveil a plan this week to bring healthier school lunches to children across the U.S.”

If the government has its way, Sister Mary Rose Christianson might as well resign herself to cursive writing knuckle smacking because the only “candy-drive” schools will be able to sponsor are “drives that ban candy and junk food from schools.”

Representing the feds Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack plans to exorcise OreosÒ from vending machines and stock them with (gag) nutritious offerings like hermetically sealed organic carrots.

The First Lady is “expected to be in the forefront of the program, having called for an end to child obesity.”  At a “healthy eating event” in Virginia Mrs. Obama, referred to Sasha and Malia’s questionable BMI.  A sensitive Michelle related to the audience admitting even the Obama’s, “Often simply don’t realize that those kids are our kids, and our kids could be in danger of becoming obese. We always think that only happens to someone else’s kid — and I was in that position.”

Hey Michelle, could it have been the “Maxed Out Pepperoni, the packets of powdered Kool-Aid, the Ham & American Stackers, or the bite-size Snickers bars” fellow students spotted in Sasha’s lunch box? But I digress.

According to Michelle’s new [ain’t it great to be a kid] policy all of America’s children, including Sasha and Malia, will be treated to quite a different fare in their Jonas Brother lunch boxes. “The girls had to adhere to new ground rules – less burgers, low-fat milk, fruits and water instead of sugary drinks; the change was significant.”

How will Big Brother accomplish the goal? “The administration reportedly asked for another $1 billion in addition to the $18 billion already set aside for the federal meals program in order to fund the initiative.” The U.S. is not the first to nudge junk food-lovers toward better choices. In 2004, socialized medicine blessed Britain received help from Celebrity chef Jamie Oliver and $436 million dollars in healthy school lunch monies to launch a similar initiative.

In the near future, memories of cubed red dye #40 Jell-O, little brown bags of M&M’s, French fries and Corn Dog Mondays are slated to fade into the past. Michelle Obama, Tom Vilsack and the federal government plan to woo red licorice eaters to class with pumpkin rice laksa soup, government provided Vitaminwater and a side of delicious soy chips.  Yummy!

%d bloggers like this: