re: #191 Jadespring

I don’t see anything in that article or more importantly the actual full remarks that the article butchered that suggests anything about anyone ‘forcing’ restaurants or people to do anything. Is she talking about the government enacting laws? Making it something a restaurant HAS to do or be punished? No. Not that I can see.

What I read is a lot of suggestions of things that restaurants and people can do to help promote better eating and suggestions that can help people have the opportunity for making choices. Apples as a side dish option instead of just automatically french fries? Great idea. Hell even Micky D’s is doing that one. Doesn’t mean you HAVE to have apples. A couple of restaurants where I live actually have changed their menus to offer these types of things as well as the old stand bys. One’s and chain and one’s and regular old Mom and Pop burger diner. Still lots of people choosing the french fries but at least now there are more choices.

I agree she isn’t calling for mass bans on unhealthy food in those remarks, my point was merely that she was starting to expand past where actual government intervention might be needed (some cases of childhood obesity) and into areas where it is much less needed (menu suggestions for restaurants).

She’s the First Lady and I realize has no direct authority to do anything policy wise - I’m not running out and buying a deep fryer to make sure I can keep on eating as if I intend to kill myself for fear of government intervention, just voicing my personal opinion that I hope it stays in the realm of speeches and suggestions and doesn’t morph later into legislation, that’s all.

(I’m not sure how many restaurant owners hadn’t thought of offering healthy side-items before this speech, seems to be a national trend now that’s been moving for a couple years - especially in the fast food area).