How the nanny president sees himself -- and us

[Boo Radley]

Then you are divorced from reality. Sad.

No, I'm not. I just don't spin every comment to mean something it doesn't. :coffeepap

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

No, I'm not. I just don't spin every comment to mean something it doesn't. :coffeepap

How many posts are you going to whine about the same windmills thier don? :lol:


Every post of yours is this crying about words and thier meaning, in a pseudo-intellectual attempt to avoid discussion... impdaddy:

 

[Paschendale]

Not sailing at all. Read more carefully the responses. I see no evidence Obama actually thinks he knows better than us.

He's much better educated than I and has a whole bunch of advisors. Our leaders SHOULD know better than we do. That's their job!

 

[Boo Radley]

How many posts are you going to whine about the same windmills thier don? :lol:


Every post of yours is this crying about words and thier meaning, in a pseudo-intellectual attempt to avoid discussion... impdaddy:

Words and language are important. So are premises. This starts with a faulty premise. Not only does it not matter what Obama or anything thinks they know, but there is no actual evidence that Obama thinks he knows what is best for us, at least not more than any other leader who goes to Washington to do our work. Just because someone throws up something silly doesn't mean it deserves to be treated as if it were valid. I never treated teh 9/11 inside job as if it were valdi either. Nor did I treat the Bush is Hitler as valid. Nor should I have. Silliness is silliness and should be treated as it is.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Words and language are important. So are premises. This starts with a faulty premise. Not only does it not matter what Obama or anything thinks they know, but there is no actual evidence that Obama thinks he knows what is best for us, at least not more than any other leader who goes to Washington to do our work. Just because someone throws up something silly doesn't mean it deserves to be treated as if it were valid. I never treated teh 9/11 inside job as if it were valdi either. Nor did I treat the Bush is Hitler as valid. Nor should I have. Silliness is silliness and should be treated as it is.

Didn't even read this, your first sentence indicates to me that you are still on your nonsensical obfuscation boo radley shuffle. :shrug:

 

[Boo Radley]

He's much better educated than I and has a whole bunch of advisors. Our leaders SHOULD know better than we do. That's their job!

There's a difference in that and the leap I think some are amking. Some are arguing that he has some superiority conflict that means he wants to impose his will on everyone. There's no real evidence of that. He's making educated judgments as all leaders do, and following the processes our constitution allows for. And if we don't like his efforts, we'll likely vote someone else in.

 

[Boo Radley]

Didn't even read this, your first sentence indicates to me that you are still on your nonsensical obfuscation boo radley shuffle. :shrug:

You not reading things would explain a lot. :roll:

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

You not reading things would explain a lot. :roll:

You posting an intellectual musing of any sort would be "a lot". impdaddy:

 

[Grim17]

And just how do you know the details of the setting in which this was done? You appear to be providing detail and facts that are not in evidence in the article. You are making assumptions and jumping to conclusions to make negative comments about the President.

I was giving examples within the facts.

The fact is, Obama saw a certain staffer who was overweight and:
1) He didn't like it.
2) He thought it was unhealthy
3) He believed it was a problem
4) He thought it needed be fixed.
5) He decided he would fix the problem
6) He decided the staffer would have salad for lunch.

If I don't agree with, or have concerns about, a persons health, safety, or lifestyle, that doesn't give me the right to force them to do what I feel is best for them. All anyone can do is express their concerns... What a person chooses to do, or not do, is completely up to them. It's called "Freedom".

Btw, lets be honest here... What Obama was really saying was "Your Fat, you shouldn't be fat, so I've decided you're going to eat a salad for lunch to lose weight." He not only crosses the line by deciding what the staffer would eat, but doing so had to be insulting and embarrassing too. I don't know about you, but if someone I worked with told me what to eat, what to say, what to wear, or tried to dictate how I lived my life, I would tell them where to go, and I certainly wouldn't be their friend.

 

[Boo Radley]

You posting an intellectual musing of any sort would be "a lot". impdaddy:

You do spend way too much time on "me." I'm flattered, really, but I would prefer you actually address the points. :coffeepap

 

[haymarket]

I was giving examples within the facts.

The fact is, Obama saw a certain staffer who was overweight and:
1) He didn't like it.
2) He thought it was unhealthy
3) He believed it was a problem
4) He thought it needed be fixed.
5) He decided he would fix the problem
6) He decided the staffer would have salad for lunch.

If I don't agree with, or have concerns about, a persons health, safety, or lifestyle, that doesn't give me the right to force them to do what I feel is best for them. All anyone can do is express their concerns... What a person chooses to do, or not do, is completely up to them. It's called "Freedom".

Btw, lets be honest here... What Obama was really saying was "Your Fat, you shouldn't be fat, so I've decided you're going to eat a salad for lunch to lose weight." He not only crosses the line by deciding what the staffer would eat, but doing so had to be insulting and embarrassing too. I don't know about you, but if someone I worked with told me what to eat, what to say, what to wear, or tried to dictate how I lived my life, I would tell them where to go, and I certainly wouldn't be their friend.

But how do you or others here who have said as much know that this was done in a public setting to humiliate the man? This has been said several times and there is no facts to support it. People are adding to this out of an ideological desire to attack Obama.

You did exactly this in your own post #17. MaggieD did it before you in her post #11.

 

[Objective Voice]

What I think is hilarious and extremely hypocritacal of those who are now trying to paint a White House that's concerned for the health and well being of the people it's been entrusted to govern is these same critics are the one's calling so many people on entitlement programs lazy and shiftless. Well, here's an Administration that sees the obesity problem and dares to say to the American people, "Hey, you're fat! Get off your butt and exercise and eat right!" And all you people can do is critisize and make these outlandish claims that suggesting healthier living is trying to control people? Un-freakin'-real!

You people never fail to amaze me with your outlandish claims and foolishness.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

You do spend way too much time on "me." I'm flattered, really, but I would prefer you actually address the points. :coffeepap

I respond to "new posts" the fact I see your nonsense pop up is happenstance. Don't flatter yourself peace time. impdaddy:

 

[Objective Voice]

I was giving examples within the facts.

The fact is, Obama saw a certain staffer who was overweight and:
1) He didn't like it.
2) He thought it was unhealthy
3) He believed it was a problem
4) He thought it needed be fixed.
5) He decided he would fix the problem
6) He decided the staffer would have salad for lunch.

If I don't agree with, or have concerns about, a persons health, safety, or lifestyle, that doesn't give me the right to force them to do what I feel is best for them. All anyone can do is express their concerns... What a person chooses to do, or not do, is completely up to them. It's called "Freedom".

Btw, lets be honest here... What Obama was really saying was "Your Fat, you shouldn't be fat, so I've decided you're going to eat a salad for lunch to lose weight." He not only crosses the line by deciding what the staffer would eat, but doing so had to be insulting and embarrassing too. I don't know about you, but if someone I worked with told me what to eat, what to say, what to wear, or tried to dictate how I lived my life, I would tell them where to go, and I certainly wouldn't be their friend.

Now, wait a minute...

What if this were a Fortune 500 company and the CEO did this very same thing to one of their employees? Would you be tic'd off then?

I say considering that the President made this gesture to one of his "staffers", i.e., one of "HIS employees", he has every right to inform the guy his physical appearance does not meet his standards for the work environment or for the level of professionalism his boss wishes him to portray. Now, could the President have done this same thing in another way, i.e., making a notation is the staffer's annual or mid-term performance evaluation? Sure, absoultely! But why put off what you can calmly and maturely address between adults?

If these were a CEO to an employee, we'd all be saying the CEO had the right to enforce certain standards of appearance within the workplace. This is no different.

Move on...next!!

 

[Grim17]

Well, here's an Administration that sees the obesity problem and dares to say to the American people, "Hey, you're fat! Get off your butt and exercise and eat right!".

There's nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, I already stated such.

This isn't about telling overweight people that they need to get fit, this is about Obama telling someone they needed to eat healthier and making them eat a salad for lunch that they did not want.

Can you see the difference?

 

[Grim17]

Now, wait a minute...

What if this were a Fortune 500 company and the CEO did this very same thing to one of their employees? Would you be tic'd off then?

I say considering that the President made this gesture to one of his "staffers", i.e., one of "HIS employees", he has every right to inform the guy his physical appearance does not meet his standards for the work environment or for the level of professionalism his boss wishes him to portray. Now, could the President have done this same thing in another way, i.e., making a notation is the staffer's annual or mid-term performance evaluation? Sure, absoultely! But why put off what you can calmly and maturely address between adults?

If these were a CEO to an employee, we'd all be saying the CEO had the right to enforce certain standards of appearance within the workplace. This is no different.

Move on...next!!

Nice strawman!

 

[roughdraft274]

No where, in The Constitution, does it have a weight limit that citizens must meet. When you start invading individual liberties, where do you draw the line?

And who is proposing a weight limit?

When you start dragging everything out to the edge of a slippery slope you lose sight of reality. The president offering a salad to a friend does not equal forcing weight limits on american citizens any more than the mods around here banning a spammer equals them being hitler.

 

[Whovian]

Now, wait a minute...

What if this were a Fortune 500 company and the CEO did this very same thing to one of their employees? Would you be tic'd off then?

I say considering that the President made this gesture to one of his "staffers", i.e., one of "HIS employees", he has every right to inform the guy his physical appearance does not meet his standards for the work environment or for the level of professionalism his boss wishes him to portray. Now, could the President have done this same thing in another way, i.e., making a notation is the staffer's annual or mid-term performance evaluation? Sure, absoultely! But why put off what you can calmly and maturely address between adults?

If these were a CEO to an employee, we'd all be saying the CEO had the right to enforce certain standards of appearance within the workplace. This is no different.

Move on...next!!

Bull****. I would personally be against it if it was Obama, some CEO, or someones boss at BurgerPuke.

Anyway, if the guys physical appearance does not meet Obama's standards for the work environment or for the level of professionalism he wishes him to portray, why was he hired in the first place?

In any case, all the liberals are whining about the Salad-gate... when that's not even the point! The point is all the other things Obama does to show us he knows better than we do, and that we should just STFU and do what he says.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Imagine if a mayor of a large city on the east coast east of Jersey was all nanny statist.. :ssst:

 

[Boo Radley]

Bull****. I would personally be against it if it was Obama, some CEO, or someones boss at BurgerPuke.

Anyway, if the guys physical appearance does not meet Obama's standards for the work environment or for the level of professionalism he wishes him to portray, why was he hired in the first place?

In any case, all the liberals are whining about the Salad-gate... when that's not even the point! The point is all the other things Obama does to show us he knows better than we do, and that we should just STFU and do what he says.

I simply see no evidence of this. I think this is more someone's personal view clouding how they read this and other things. In otherwords, you bias, and the bias others hold, makes you read things in a way they are really not. Try running this by someone who isn't inclined to see it as you do.

 

[roughdraft274]

In any case, all the liberals are whining about the Salad-gate... when that's not even the point!

If it's not the point that you're wishing to convey then you shouldn't make a thread about it. If he's trampling in your life and limiting your personal freedoms and you want to talk about that I think you'd be better off talking about those actual infractions rather than how he offered a salad to someone.

 

[Whovian]

If it's not the point that you're wishing to convey then you shouldn't make a thread about it. If he's trampling in your life and limiting your personal freedoms and you want to talk about that I think you'd be better off talking about those actual infractions rather than how he offered a salad to someone.

don't focus on the salad... open your eyes a tiny bit wider. I know that's asking a lot, but whatever.

 

[roughdraft274]

don't focus on the salad... open your eyes a tiny bit wider. I know that's asking a lot, but whatever.

Is it possible that we both have our eyes open and are seeing the same thing and that we still have different opinions of the matter or is the only explanation that one of us walks around with our forearm slapping our chest with drool hanging out of our mouths constantly and is just so retarded that they can't see the completely transparent and obvious nature of what the other person thinks is going on. Lets be honest, if everything is so black and white, the country wouldn't be so divided.

Either a part of the country is right and the President is purposely trying to destroy the country and the other part is so retarded that everytime they try to even think about politics they piss their pants.

Or the President is the best president we've ever had, has never made a mistake, is the smartest and strongest man in the world and half of the country is just to racist to see past his skin.

Or it's somewhere in the middle, where we have a president trying his best to alleviate the situation he stepped into given his resources and half the country will defend him regardless of whether he made the right decision or not cause they think he's doing a good job considering the circumstances and the other half disagrees with some or many details of his policies and sometimes might over react over minute details.

I tend to fall into the third category.

 

[Objective Voice]

There's nothing wrong with that at all. In fact, I already stated such.

This isn't about telling overweight people that they need to get fit, this is about Obama telling someone they needed to eat healthier and making them eat a salad for lunch that they did not want.

Can you see the difference?

What strawman? It's me being honest.

Certainly, I can see the difference. But I also see that as this staffer's boss, the President has that right to tell a member of his staff - an employee - that the individual is not upholding to appearance (or health) standards he expects. As I said in my last post, if this were a CEO of a company who did this and offerred the employee something healthier to eat, none of you would likely have much to say about it. If fact, I'm willing to bet most of you would be saying, "Good for the CEO!" But since it's President Obama...

 

[Objective Voice]

Bull****. I would personally be against it if it was Obama, some CEO, or someones boss at BurgerPuke.

Anyway, if the guys physical appearance does not meet Obama's standards for the work environment or for the level of professionalism he wishes him to portray, why was he hired in the first place?

In any case, all the liberals are whining about the Salad-gate... when that's not even the point! The point is all the other things Obama does to show us he knows better than we do, and that we should just STFU and do what he says.

Is it possible the staffer wasn't overweight when first hired? Stress manifests itself in many ways, for most people it's weight gain. Ask a woman; she'll tell ya'. And do we know for sure this was just some ordinary staffer or was it someone the Prpesident shares a mutual respect? All we're focused no is "Eeeeee! The President handed a fat man a salad and said eat it!" Well, big whoop! Maybe what the staffer needed was for someone to finally look him in the eye and tell him the truth about himself.

What I'm saying is unlike "Paul Havery," we don't have all the facts. Still, giving an employee something healthy to eat isn't a bad thing. I'd think folks would appreciate that instead of seeing it as overstepping one's bounds or humiliating.