Michelle Obama: International Hostess

Mrs. Obama has advocated for eating locally grown foods and so the dinner will feature produce and livestock from the farm.
“My family and I hold Rosemont Farm close to our hearts,” said Mrs. Heinz in a statement released by the White House, “I look forward to sharing our Farm with our honored guests from across the world and am thrilled to have the opportunity to show them the natural and local beauty Pittsburgh has to offer.”
============
You know, I’m fine with the “eat locally” movement.
But there is something hilarious about world leaders and their hundreds of support staff traveling from all corners of the earth to New York, then traipsing to Pittsburgh to purposefully eat locally grown food.

AT 2:45 pm she will be giving a demonstration of “Patient Dumping”
accompanied by Valerie Jarret

clown, do you mean the documented ‘patient dumping’ practiced by our private health insurance companies to increase their profits?
Three cheers for the public insurance option.

Maybe Mrs Obama should tell her husband to turn the water back on in the California orchards where so many people are out of work (unable to farm), and standing in food lines for no reason but a small fish!!!

MayBee – Maybe you didn’t read the article closely enough. World leaders will be at the UN in New York, then in Pittsburgh for the G-20 Summit. They are NOT “traipsing” to Pittsburgh just for local food.
It is not just MayBee that does this selective reading – somehow conservatives don’t process information the same way normal people do. Almost as if it isn’t real if it hasn’t been said by Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, or Beck.

Interesting.
The last time a FLOTUS and POTUS were this unpopular with the (ahem) “unwashed masses” — both houses were flooded with Republicans to stop them. It looks like we are in for a repeat performance in 2010.

Maybee, come on, admit it, you just didn’t read closely. It happens to us all.
=========
Perhaps you could tell me what was wrong with my statement.
As far as I know, while they are in New York discussing climate change, they are clogging city blocks with their limousine,
but not particularly ‘eating locally’. Perhaps they are talking about how wasteful incandescent lightbulbs are over dinner.
Once they traipse off to Pittsburgh, they will be treated to the ‘eat locally’ message.
A message, I contend, that has more oomph when the people are in fact eating locally, not traveling in large numbers and long distances to get the food.

How much is this costing the Tax Payers for Michelle to fly to Europe,and beg for the Olympics to be held in Chi town.

Tell them to turn the water back on in CALIFORNIA….give me a break !!!!!!

MayBee | Sep 22, 2009 2:15:46 PM posted “Yes, I’m sure the leaders of India and China need to have a talk with their people about eating locally.”
Actually, MayBee, here’s why we need the conversation about eating locally: The world needs a paradigm shift in agriculture toward more sustainable and ecologically friendly practices that would benefit the world’s 900 million small farmers, not just Agribusiness.
Back in 1943 as many as four million people died in the Bengal Famine. So the world focused on the green revolution: new seeds, new farming techniques, new pesticides. Between the 1950s to the 90s the world doubled average yields of corn, rice, and wheat. But today world population is marching toward 9 billion, crop yield growth has flattened, and somehow, the world needs to double food production by 2030.
Today China has to import US and Brazilian grain to feed its growing demand for pork. Importing grain and forcing farmers to rely on expensive petro-fertilizers produced on another continent may make money for big companies, but it won’t feed 9 Billon.
The world needs to add local, agroecological methods for a new green revolution. Something truly worth planning globally with China and India.

I hope she leaves her belts at home this time.

The last four first ladies have accomplished more than she ever will.

Beginning global discussions about building a new green revolution is not a “Luxury” – it is survival.
===========
The luxury is the choice to deny yourself purchases of food because they don’t meet certain parameters. Parameters like distance from field to market, that will make no practical improvement to the lives of one single impoverished Indian farmer. And it certainly isn’t a ‘healthier’ alternative for you.
That type of choice is a luxury to people who cannot eat. That is a limit people from a country of plenty put on themselves because we know there is more food coming.
As I said, actually helping farmers around the world is good.
Nominal, feel-good efforts are just that.
Perhaps the farmers in India would like to start growing more food for their local village. But perhaps they would like to grow enough food to actually export their food and make more money. They need improvements in agriculture methods and infrastructure to do either thing, but one choice imagines a much more limited future for them.

I,too,wonder and worry how much it’s going to cost for Michelle and her entourage not to mention her security detail also to traipse over to Europe just so she can put in her two cents worth about the Olympics coming possibly to Chicago all for the glory of hopefully getting the Olympics to come to Chicago for her husband’s sake. I believe the Obama’s have in his short time in office had more trips overseas and he constantly is visiting state after state. He spends more time away from the White House than he does in it.

That’s not unusual. Being proud of a pretty face with a blank record as first lady.

JV wrote: “The last four first ladies have accomplished more than she ever will.”
And how, pray tell, are you able to see into the future?

MayBee: Promoting a diversified global food chain goes way beyond “feel good efforts” for “local villages”.
=========
Why do you keep rearranging my words to say things I obviously didn’t say?
I made a distinction between real efforts and feel good efforts.

What has she done to top Nancy, Barbara, Hillary and Laura? As far as first ladies go?

JV wrote: “The last four first ladies have accomplished more than she ever will.”
I asked: “And how, pray tell, are you able to see into the future?”
JV’s nonresponsive reply was: “’See into the future’! What an imagination!”
JV, you made the claim that other first ladies have accomplished more than “she ever will.” Firstly, I’m assuming that “she” refers to the subject of this blog, Michelle Obama. Secondly, “ever will” encompasses future events. So, I ask again, how are you able to see into the future?

Like I said, What has Michelle done?