Can your Government tell you what to eat?

         Kathleen Parker is a right-leaning Washington Post commentator, who received the Pulitzer Prize in 2010.  Parker contributes several columns on politics and culture. Her cultural articles typically take on a nature vs. nutrure approach.  Her political critiques support preserving the wealth and power of upper class, elites and social hierarchy.        
         In Parker’s article, “Health reform and obesity: Eat, drink and watch out!”  Her  argument pontificates  a compelling approach to this question-- Do we really need a new food pyramid or chart for persuading Americans to shift to a healthier lifestyle?

Kathleen Parker speculates as a culture we are too busy to worry about a food chart/ pyramid, and relationships with her rounded statements, “listen to your parents — if you can find them… Our drive-through culture, which applies to relationships as well as mealtimes, is the real enemy of fitness and health.”  She has the reader left asking themselves three questions; One is it our fault we are obese? Second, who is the real enemy? Finally, why are we failing in parental relationships?  Parker blames the parents.  She expresses adults make daily nutritional food choices and those individuals are considered consciously responsible.

          Parker’s editorial is filled with entertaining phrases such as, “Fat is the new nicotine,  I wouldn’t touch a trans fat if you wrapped it in gold and sprinkled it with diamonds and married parents who torture their kids with rules — probably would do the trick as well.”

She keeps the audience engaged by personalizing and showing her own shortcomings as a parent declaring, “I told my son when he left for college: “You’re gonna miss my takeout.” That being said, her key audience is women—that is, identifying with hard working, married women about the ages thirty five and older who maintain the family.  These women strive to be “Martha Stewart’s” and instantly recognize Martha’s key phrase “good things.”  She chooses these women because they do not want to fail as mothers.  For example in her expression, “you can be sure that not-such-good-things will come your way.”  Kathleen Parker shows the  reality of our inadequacies failing to grasp the stereotypical “perfect” parent. Parker obscures her conservative opionion by keeping with tradition like a 1950’s perfect mother.  She hides her intentions under the guise of motherhood. Parker wants those women who have slender children to trust they are doing “good things” and those mothers who have obese children as substandard mothers. 

            The political significance of this argument was to keep government out of personal life.

As a right leaning journalist she scrutinized MichelleObama trying get kids to eat thier vegetables by stating “Who better than the mother in chief?”  She hids behind banters poking fun at the first lady by comparing her to a ‘stepford housewife’ or a ‘Martha Stewart’.  You can almost hear the sarcasim, If you can’t listen to Michelle… God forbid! 
            Kathleen Parker also throws in a jab at the health care bill expressing,  “as inevitably will be the case under the Affordable Care Act, government necessarily will become more involved in personal nutrition issues.” Her attitude of oh you just wait until Affordable Care Act and ffood should not be the government’s responsibility but the obligation of each individual.  Unfortunately, her opinion does more harm than good. Her approach ignores the root cause of the obesity issue with an attitude that the problem will simply fix itself.  She portrays the stance if we are not careful; the government will be in charge of what, when and how we eat.

Kathleen Parker’s argument was unsuccessful and she lost credibility supporting Corporate America exercise healthy weight commitment  this site is sponsored by companies such as Delmonte, Sara Lee, Coke, Pepsi, and Campbell’s, Mars Inc. & Nestles, but are they not the problem?  I do not know of any candy bar making individuals thinner.  These corporations thrive with salt, sugar, and cash flow.  That being said I do agree with her two statements, “These family values should be taught at home and the solution is family.”