Much is being said today about the doctors’ recommendations from Obama’s physical. All the talk centers on a little line in the UK Guardian:
The doctors also recommended "moderation of alcohol intake" Is Obama taking risk with his health by his drinking and smoking? As the President of the USA should he be taking such risks with his life and the presidency? If Obama is only drinking in moderation that is fine. But the smoking is way too risky. It is his body to do with what he chooses. But he is also the President and should respect that possition enough to try and quite smoking and drinking so much. He wants the best health care in the world but then he goes out and does these things. We know he things civil employees should get the best health care money and the tax payers can buy. But is he just talking out his butt when he turns around and drinks and smokes? Is that why he thinks that no one can take care of themselves? Because he can't.
Let them eat cake.
ReplyDeleteObama is the Hypocrite's Hypocrite. Our taxes are paying for his health care, including when he gets lung cancer. What a jerk. He's probably still snorting coke too. That's Bruce's kind of guy.
I don't think he is still doing coke but this is a high risk for a president to take with his and the countries wellbeing. He must not care if he can't stop smoking and drinking. Or he is just another addict.
ReplyDeleteYeah, you are probably right anonymous. That was wrong of me to suggest he is still doing coke. However, he is still smoking and drinking in a high-stress job. Not only is that going to be costing us down the road, but what kind of example does that set for our kids?
ReplyDeleteJust to give everyone a heads up, we might have a special guest making comments on this blog. He may have different views than conservatives (or maybe we will find some common ground), but he keeps things civil and has an open mind. I'm hoping he can provide more open and better dialog than what we have been getting from Bruce and others. So, his name might be Wayhix, or he might choose a different handle, but make him feel welcome if you can.
ReplyDeleteLOL ... A Conservative Teacher has a hilarious one today. Check out the link for the picture:
ReplyDeleteBreaking News: Killer Whale Linked to Tea Party
http://aconservativeteacher.blogspot.com/2010/03/breaking-news-killer-whale-linked-to.html
TNOYF News has just received this photo of the killer whale Tilikum at a tea-party rally. Here we see the the radical right wing mammal at a John Birch Society gathering, where he apparently engaged in anti-Obama hate rhetoric and then was encouraged to bite his trainer by NRA gun freaks. The evidence to support these claims is forthcoming by trained journalists at the MSM.
Cool I can't wait to hear from him John. What ever happened to Carl?
ReplyDeleteIt would be nice to have someone that can explain the lefts views. Wayhix you are more then welcome to debate the issues. I have always welcomed both sides of the issues. Sometimes it gets hot but it never lasts long.
ReplyDeleteMy god, there was an admitted alcoholic in the White House for 8 years and the people like you never said a word.
ReplyDeletelol ... typical FAILk mentality! Bruce, if the man doesn't DRINK anymore, what more can he do? He can't UN-drink every beer he ever had, can he?
ReplyDeleteDid you guys see the Gallup poll that shows Republicans are 37% more pro-Israel than Democrats? The Democrats are working hard at alienating every last bit of their base.
ReplyDeleteCathy, I guess Carl disappeared rather than apologize for his unfounded accusations. That's more honorable than Bruce, who sticks around just to make more unfounded accusations.
ReplyDeleteOh lordy, does this administration know what it's doing? Way to piss off the British Secretary Clinton! What is with these people's desire to befriend our enemies and damage relationships with our friends?
ReplyDeletehttp://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/02/british-irate-over-hillary-comments-on-falklands/
Bruce Bush quit drinking. Obama is still drinking and smoking. Big difference.
ReplyDeleteMy take on this is that if one wants to smoke , then smoke. But just don't go around saying you are going quit and then don't let alone talk about health care.
ReplyDeleteAs to the drinking part it is much the same, I would never begruge a sitting president from a beer or two, even Jesus drank wine, right. It is however the doctors wording here using the term 'to moderate' which can only mean that Hussein is drinking in excess.
Bruce , you are getting dumber by the minute now.
GWB was a recovering alcoholic who vowed (as most recovering alcoholics do) to never again touch the stuff and, as far as we know, he didn't while he was in the White House.
ReplyDeleteObama drinking beer doesn't necessarily make him an alcoholic. Hopefully we can all agree on that. I agree w/ Christopher though that the use of the word "moderation" is telling. A 49 year old man should not drink as much as B. Hussein Hopeychange does, for pure health reasons alone. Heck, I'm 33 and I shouldn't drink as much beer (2-3 a night) as I do.
However. Smoking is one of the most hazardous things one can do to one's health, and it makes perfect sense that such a destructive person would be all about socialized medicine. That way, he doesn't have to bear any PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for his choices.
Should Obama be taking such risks as smoking and heavy drinking? What if he is a buzzed and gets that call? Does he call Biden and tell him that while he is under the influence of alcohol Biden is in charge? If you should drive intoxicated then you should run the country intoxicated either. And what about his girls seeing him like that?
ReplyDeleteModerate drinking is probably best defined as the level of drinking that poses a low risk of alcohol-related problems, both for the drinker and for others. It is difficult to give a quantitative definition of moderate drinking because alcohol can have different effects on different individuals depending on age, size, sex and health. It also relates to when and how you consume alcohol as both the speed of consumption and drinking with food will affect the absorption of alcohol.
ReplyDeleteWhat is moderation?
The US Government explains in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2005 that, “The consumption of alcohol can have beneficial or harmful effects depending on the amount consumed, age and other characteristics of the person consuming the alcohol, and the specifics of the situation.” This represents the official US nutrition policy.
The Guidelines emphasize moderation for those who choose to drink –“defined as the consumption of up to one drink a day for women and up to two drinks a day for men.”
Men:
2 drinks (14g)
per day
Women:
1 drink (14g)
per day
5 fluid ounces of wine, 12 fluid ounces of regular beer, or 1.5 fluid ounces of 80-proof distilled spirits count as one drink for purposes of explaining moderation.
This definition of moderation is not intended as an average over several days but rather as the amount consumed on any single day.
Generally, those adults who choose to drink should do so in a sensible manner as part of a healthy diet and lifestyle and preferably around mealtime or with food.
The Bottom Line Message
Most people, who drink, do so moderately and responsibly as part of a healthy diet and lifestyle. Common sense tells us to drink responsibly at any time and especially if you are planning to drive or undertake other activities that require skills. When people talk about the lifestyle benefits of alcoholic beverages, they’re usually referring to the pleasant, relaxed feeling and enhanced sociability that often results from drinking. When scientists and health professionals talk about the benefits of alcohol use, however, they are primarily referring to the fact that moderate drinking may reduce the risk of certain diseases, especially coronary heart disease in men over 40 and post-menopausal women.
Alcohol can be enjoyed as part of a healthy lifestyle in moderation, but as the USDA guidelines say "It is not recommended that anyone begin drinking or drink more frequently on the basis of health". Enjoyment of wine, beer and spirits has formed a pleasurable part of many traditions, cultures and some religions around the globe since civilisation began.
But it looks like Obama is not a moderate but a heavy drinker. Shame on him for putting himself and our country in harms way.
Obama used to do coke? I don't believe it.
ReplyDeleteLast week, Congress voted to extend three provisions of the so-called U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T Act (aka Patriot Act) for another year.
ReplyDeleteYou can see how your Representative voted here: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll067.xml
But if you do that you'll think we've sent you to the wrong link. You'll see that the title on the bill is "Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act."
You see, H.R. 3961 originally started with that title and subject, and it passed the House in November. Then, this past Wednesday, Majority Leader Harry Reid ripped the guts out of the bill and replaced it with the Patriot extensions. The Senate then passed that version of the bill and sent it back to the House, where it was approved Thursday night.
Now, you may be asking, where's the link to the Senate roll call vote?
Well, there isn't one. The bill passed by Unanimous Consent, which means a voice vote.
Everything about this process and bill is offensive to DownsizeDC.org . . .
* changing the subject of the bill by amendment violates our One Subject At A Time Act
* there was no 7-day waiting period before votes in either chamber, violating our requirements in the Read the Bills Act
* Congress neither let the provisions expire (our preference), nor reformed the Patriot Act for greater accountability and civil liberties protections
We can, however, mention some good news . . .
* Democrats thwarted Republican attempts to extend the provisions to four years instead of just one
* Rep. Conyers says he's still committed to reforming the Patriot Act this year
Nevertheless, we believe civil libertarians in Congress wasted a great opportunity to roll back or repeal key provisions of the Patriot Act.
Go to DownsizeDC.org and voice your displeasure at the same old Washington tactics.
Good point anonymous, I didn't think about someone who has had a beer having their finger on the button. Reminds me of the great MadTV piece, where a guy went on a drinking binge and woke up as President. He had solved all the world problems while he was drunk. Pretty funny.
ReplyDeleteBut that's TV, and this is the real world. And when I can be thrown in jail for operating a car after having one beer, I sure hope our President shows some restraint in drinking while he's driving our country. So far he's spending like a drunk sailor on shore leave.
Why Americans Hate Washington By Debra J. Saunders (03/02/10)
ReplyDeleteIn January, the Senate joined the House in passing "pay-as-you-go" rules to require Congress to pay for new discretionary spending. On Feb. 12, President Obama signed the bill. "Now Congress will have to pay for what it spends, just like everybody else," Obama crowed. Less than a month later, Obama and fellow Democrats are busily demonizing a lone senator for pushing Washington to spend responsibly. It seems this administration is all for fiscal restraint - as long as you don't mean it.
The story began last week when Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., blocked Senate passage of a bill to extend one month unemployment and COBRA health insurance benefits, and other spending, because it did not comply with PAYGO. As the Baseball Hall-of-Famer explained, "When 100 senators are for a bill, and we can't find $10B to pay for it, there's something the matter, seriously the matter, with this body." For that, he is Satan.
On Sunday, The New York Times ran a story about the Bunning brouhaha without mentioning why Bunning was blocking the bill. A CNN television crawl warned: "Thousands hurt by one senator." Veep Joe Biden lamented the prospect of a single senator filibustering a measure, and wished, as Politico reported, only that the senator would have to explain to the families of the Americans who could lose their benefits "how they're going to get by."
It's a heartbreaking scenario -- but it can be avoided if Capitol Hill leaders either find the $10B in a government that spends $3.8T annually or the 60 votes needed to bring the bill to the Senate floor.
A month ago, Democrats were suggesting the Repubs were phony tightwads for not joining them in support of PAYGO. It turns out, PAYGO is the phony. Two weeks after it became law, the Senate passed a $15B jobs bill exempt from PAYGO. Now Bunning is not budging. As spokesman Mike Reynard put it, "If everyone's serious about PAYGO, let's act like it."
I used to like the concept, and remember arguing with Brian Riedl of the libertarian- leaning Heritage Foundation. But he was right. As he said Monday, "PAYGO exists as a talking point in order to create the illusion of fiscal responsibility while they're ignoring it. It's designed for TV ads."
And: "The offsets are out there. Congress just has to make a difficult decision for once."
James Horney, director of federal fiscal policy at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, has a different take. The PAYGO rules, he noted, exempt emergency spending. "Right now, adding to the deficit in fact helps the economy, it doesn't hurt," Horney noted. The benefits extension "is temporary and deals with a short-term economic problem." To Horney, in exempting the bill to extend jobless benefits, PAYGO is working as it should.
Horney added, "I would have more sympathy for (Bunning) and others if they applied the same logic to new tax cuts or to extending expiring tax cuts like the estate tax."
Point taken, and it's a good one. But if supporting tax cuts years ago means a lawmaker cannot push for fiscal discipline today, then Washington will never grow up and, as Obama put it, "pay for what it spends."
Obama and the Hypocrats lie. Bunning's stand hurts people that I know and care about, but he is right. I can't wait until November when this is used to ouster the Hypocrats and their lying ways. I can see the ads now, the Hypocrats praising PAYGO, and then a few weeks later being Chicken Littles because they are being held to it. Brilliant.
ReplyDelete