The media likes to use the word “epidemic” and “health crisis” to hype problems and draw an audience's attention. When we are talking about the so-called “childhood obesity epidemic,” a little sober analysis would benefit the discussion.
New Jersey Republican Governor Chris Christie probably had more suitors than Portia in Shakespeare's "The Merchant of Venice" and yet in the end he made the right decision not to run for president. It was the correct decision on several levels.
Twenty years ago, hysteria swept through the media over "hunger in America." Dan Rather opened a CBS Evening News broadcast in 1991 declaring, "one in eight American children is going hungry tonight." Newsweek, the Associated Press and the Boston Globe repeated this statistic, and many others joined the media chorus, with or without that unsubstantiated statistic.
With nearly one in three American children overweight, it's easy to question why anyone would oppose voluntary government guidelines that would severely restrict which foods can be marketed to children.
Recall began as a progressive idea around the turn of the 20th Century, when the villains were law makers in the pockets of the “robber barons” who controlled large banks, railroads and oil. Today’s robber baron is the massive government/union axis that sucks money from the private sector and which always –always--wants more.
I guess we now have the proof of what conservatives have been saying since forever: Looting is a result of liberal welfare policies. And Britain is in the end stages of the welfare state.
If there were a contest for the most misleading words used in politics, "poverty" should be one of the leading contenders for that title.
Thanks to proposed new “voluntary guidelines” on what food companies can market to children proposed by a government interagency working group comprised of four federal agencies, Americans could see the economy lose another 74,000 jobs.