Skip to comments.Michelle Obama's Shake Shack Burger Indulgence Defended by Nutritionists (ABC News to the rescue)
Posted on 07/12/2011 7:15:50 AM PDT by kristinn
Stop the presses, Michelle Obama might have eaten a hamburger.
The blogosphere erupted with criticism almost immediately after the Washington Post reported Monday that the first lady sat down at a newly opened Shake Shack in Washington D.C., where she ordered a ShackBurger, fries, a chocolate shake and a Diet Coke. According to the popular burger joint's website, that's a 1,556-calorie meal. (sic, actually it was 1700 calories.)
Many critiqued the first lady's public display of Shake Shack love as she continues to advocate for her Let's Move! campaign, an initiative to eliminate childhood obesity.
But even as the first lady-turned-health-advocate chowed down on a meal that contains almost an entire day's recommended calorie intake, most nutrition experts are telling people to relax.
"[This is an] unfortunate invasion of privacy for Mrs. Obama," said Alice Lichtenstein, professor of nutrition science and policy at Tufts School of Medicine in Boston. "She has kept her weight constant and engages in regular physical activity. An occasional indulgence is fine. For many people, that is what helps them keep on track most of the time."
Most experts agreed with Lichtenstein, while saying that the first lady's lunch is being unnecessarily scrutinized.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
By your description, a well documented guess. What level of development are you talking about? Either Christ was at His juvenile infancy or matured to the latter stages of adolescent development. The guess is at what stage since you already defined the behavior as “juvenile”.
It supposes that no ideal should be sought unless it has already been attained. “
Would you prefer that no one cared, and just gave hypocrisy a pass?
This is the equivalent of a sports star telling kids to stay away from drugs and then snorting coke after the game...
[This is an] unfortunate invasion of privacy for Mrs. Obama, said Alice Lichtenstein, professor of nutrition science and policy ....”
Gee professor, what specific area of nutrition science deals with legal issues of “invasion of privacy”.
Stick to your area of “expertise” Alice and shove your Communist propaganda, in bending over to defend the hate-filled racist.
Michelle gives new meaning to the term “broad”
I always order a diet coke when I am drinking. Seriously. Those salted rims make me thirsty.
I can see ordering a diet coke with that meal. The milkshake is good, but not a thirst quencher.
She is still a hypocrite. Typical “do as I say and not as I do.”
“Do as I say, not as I do.” - The RatLibSocialist Motto
Not at all.
Hypocrisy is an accurate indicator, and should be recognized. However, outrage over something so ubiquitous and inherent in human behavior is juvenile.
Mrs Obama suggests that we eat better, and we should. Mrs Obama has a burger, shake & fries. Horrors!!
I smoke cigarettes. It is a really stupid thing to do. I suggest that no one take it up, and they shouldn't. I'll have another Marlboro at lunch. Outrageous!! Hypocrisy!
Yet it’s okay to invade the privacy of a Republican by complaining about the wine he drinks during a private lunch.
Of course, if it was a Republican who preached healthy eating while gobbling down giant hamburgers, ABC News would be appalled.
Apparently Michelle isn't the only one who's a flaming hypocrite.
Now, as for the subject at hand. No one cares if you smoke. I sure don't. But if A) you're the President and you tell the world you've stopped smoking, and the press uses that as just another example of your amazing personal strength, when you're really sneaking puffs out in the Rose Garden, or B) lecturing society on the “right way” to eat while using your position as First Lady to add further burdens of regulation on food processors and restaurants, and restricting food choices for private citizens as you're indulging in the very same meals that you label unhealthy, then yeah, you're going to catch some flak.
Now, if I disagree with you, I'm spitting on Jesus. Your intellect strategies are truly constabulociferous.
You don't recognize the agenda of the left. Leftists couldn't care less about the health of the citizenry. They use obesity as an excuse to tax and regulate food they deem unhealthy. They just use it as an excuse to grow the power and size of the federal government. 'Snack tax', banning happy meals, dictating what types of oils resturaunts can use, ect...
That is so the diet coke will cancel out the calories of the shake and burger!
Nah, not unfair at all. She wants to scrutinize what others eat, she should be willing to have what she eats scrutinized.
>Outrage over hypocrisy is a juvenile emotion.<
While I can see your point in part, can you explain why liberal outrage at every gaffe of target conservatives is a tenet of Alinsky’s rule stating (to paraphrase) “make your enemy live up to his ideals”? Has that rule not been effective in the past, juvenile or not?
how about Charlie Sheen as the Just Say No to Drugs spokesperson? hypocrite or no?
No. I can't. It certainly seems childish though, and I am hesitant to emulate them.
It would be different were she to say, Eat Healthier lest you end up a l@rd@$$ like me! but no, the media insists on presenting her as some epitome of a physical specimen, when the naked eye belies that fact.
>> “[This is an] unfortunate invasion of privacy for Mrs. Obama,” said Alice Lichtenstein, professor of nutrition science and policy at Tufts School of Medicine in Boston. “She has kept her weight constant and engages in regular physical activity. An occasional indulgence is fine. For many people, that is what helps them keep on track most of the time.” <<
Does anyone really think it’d be called an “invasion of privacy” if we found out that a bishop was having an affair with an adult woman? Why aren’t the High Priests ever held accountable for sins against liberalism?
(Compare to the media feast when it was leaked, in what WAS actually a criminal violation of privacy, that Bill Bennett gambled a lot, even though gambling isn’t a sin in Bennett’s religion.)
... and for the record, since when is 1700 calories an “indulgence”?
...It was actually a “crash diet” coke, for later...
More like Michelle orders Four Fried Chickens and a Coke.
When my husband managed a pizza restaurant he often commented on the number of people who ordered the meat laden double cheese deep dish pizza but then ordered diet soda.
Guess you gotta start somewhere. lol
” “[This is an] unfortunate invasion of privacy for Mrs. Obama,” said Alice Lichtenstein, professor of nutrition science and policy at Tufts School of Medicine in Boston. “She has kept her weight constant “
Yeah, Alice,you wretch.....She has been overweight with a fat butt CONSTANTLY!
We can't do any drugs, because Charlie did them all, there's none left.
(Borrowed from Dennis Leary)
"She has kept her weight constant ...."Uh-huh.
[No offense to Alabama]
My guess is that butt was that size when she was 16 y/o.
:-) I ain't touching that one.
Save your blue dress, ABC!
I applaud your righteousness, and superior Christianity. Salute.
Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them. It pisses God off.
I guess you are not off your narcs yet.
Your first post was a perfect example of self-righteousness. When you are called out for the stupidity, you hide behind disingenuous accusations and project, just like a “juvenile” would.
Also, the perpetual pattern of behavior, pointed out by other posters, is not just about “cheeseburgers”. Tyranny and the Nanny State are not to be taken lightly.
Michelle Obama holds no elected or appointed office.
Because she ate a cheesburger, you advocate she be whipped, while claiming 'thats what Jesus would do...see'.
Aside of the disturbing sexual overtones of your desire, the situation hardly calls for this level of outrage.
Ad Hominem attack. Sweet. Always a sure sign.
My dearest brother in Christ, read a book. I'm pretty sure it is from the Bible....towards the back.
(I'm making the effort to speak your language)
I bet that's the God's honest truth.
As is always the case, ad hominem attack is a determinate of argument loser.
As is usually the case, said loser immediately denies it & offers another ad hominem.
Listen, you have been a lot of fun. I hope you have a safe & enjoyable weekend.
God has blessed us with reason which concludes that pride or intoxication limits your ability to reflect on the folly of your initial post (Not ad hominem, just an astute observation, especially the pride part).
“As is usually the case, said loser immediately denies it”
Pointing out what is in your boundaries, making historic examples of “juveniles” pointing out hypocrisies, your brainless suggestion that it's an ad hominem attack and obfuscation suggests you can't create an honest rebuttal; just baseless accusations and idiotic one liners.
“Listen, you have been a lot of fun. I hope you have a safe & enjoyable weekend.”
You to and remember, shrink your boundaries.
“Every little thing she does is magic” to the MSM.
-Outrage over a note on hypocrisy.
-Ad Hominem outrage.
I'll bet you have died on a lot of petty battlefields.
MO...oink, oink! Did she have fries with that burger?