Richard Simmons â?? Congressman?

I'm thinking the reason he is holding out the possibility of running for office but being coy about the specifics is that he has already been tapped as McCain's VP. He's going to add some "zazz" to McCain's campaign and liven up the ticket! They'll call the campaign "Runnin' with the Oldies!"

-----

Richard Simmons â?? Congressman?
Posted: 09:35 AM ET

From CNN Radio Correspondent Lisa Desjardins

WASHINGTON (CNN) â?? Fitness star and effervescence extreme Richard Simmons is on Capitol Hill today, tackling the issue of childhood obesity and pushing for increased school exercise programs. But as he testifies before the House Education and Labor Committee, the 60-year-old is nodding toward that celebrity siren song: political office.

In a half-serious, half-jocular tone, Simmons described his approach to the hearing, saying, "I want to have the respect of a congressman, I want to talk like a congressman, and maybe, someday, I'll be a congressman."

During three minutes of follow-up questions, Simmons displayed an almost Washingtonian flare for avoiding a direct position. "However I can be of use," he said, "If my country wants me, I'll be there for my country."

So has no plans to run?

"Well," he answered coyly, "I don't know. I may run for office. You never know."

True to his cause, Simmons seemed most interested in possible health-related jobs in a new administration. "(The new president) is going to have to look at the statistics of what's happening to our kids," Simmons told CNN Radio, "And then he's going to say who can we turn to? And it certainly isn't the Ghostbusters."

The fitness king cited former wrestler and Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura as an example of the famous turned politician. He's not ruling it out.

"After this congressional hearing, I will go home," Simmons said, "I will talk with my Dalmatian dogs, I will pray to God and then I'll see what else I can do to help."

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - Richard Simmons — Congressman? « - Blogs from CNN.com

I know the guy's an annoying floof that a lot of people love to hate, but I have to have a begrudging respect for the guy. He has helped a lot of people live healthier lifestyles, including one woman who was the most obese human being alive at the time. I forget her name, saw the program years ago, but she couldn't even get out of bed and he whipped her down to roughly 160 lbs. Started it all just by playing some music and getting her to clap in bed. Seriously, that's it, clap. Worked with her, free of charge, and clapped the pounds off until she could finally get out of bed and move on to more excercises. I have to give props where they're due.

Well, if he can clap the pounds off the fattest woman in the world, maybe he could slap the shit out of congress.

I would love to see the whole child obesity problem brought back under wraps.

It's getting kind a little out of hand and people say that it's getting bad, and I haven't really seen much effort of those people fighting against it

So, if it means a turn for the better, which we ALL need right now, then he's got my support

Oh holy AAARGH...!!!!!
Childhood obesity isn't what we elect Congress to deal with. FUCK. Next someone is going to start bitching about a lack of hygiene and next thing you know they'll be making a law about how we should wipe our asses. The government is supposed to handle shit that is too large and too complicated for the people to deal with on a small scale- economic planning, foreign policy, infrastructure- not telling us what to feed our fucking children! This is totally ridiculous- yet ANOTHER red herring tossed out as something for us to fixate on while the school systems themselves are suffering. Yeah.. let's spend more tax money on mandated exercise programs, while the kids go home and vegetate in front of their fucking xboxes. What ever happened to riding Big Wheels with the other neighborhood kids?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stinkyattic

Oh holy AAARGH...!!!!!
Childhood obesity isn't what we elect Congress to deal with. FUCK. Next someone is going to start bitching about a lack of hygiene and next thing you know they'll be making a law about how we should wipe our asses. The government is supposed to handle shit that is too large and too complicated for the people to deal with on a small scale- economic planning, foreign policy, infrastructure- not telling us what to feed our fucking children! This is totally ridiculous- yet ANOTHER red herring tossed out as something for us to fixate on while the school systems themselves are suffering. Yeah.. let's spend more tax money on mandated exercise programs, while the kids go home and vegetate in front of their fucking xboxes. What ever happened to riding Big Wheels with the other neighborhood kids?

---

I have to disagree StinkyAttic. I'm all for keeping the government out of our business, not telling us how to raise our kids, but they already do have a stake in food standards, as they should. We have institutions like the FDA for a reason (hate the fuckers, but a necessary evil). Food standards can be set up for large-scale, commercial food chains. Initiatives such as trans-fat bans, mandatory nutritional facts, and public education all come in to play. We don't let restaraunts put any old shit in their food like lead in the drinks, or nicotine in the candy. There are legal standards set by government (on the advice of the FDA) that mandate what can or can't go into our food, how informed we should be, what we allow in children's products, and what is an acceptable level of toxins or other harmful substances.


Whether it be healthcare, food standards, drug policy, or law, the government does have a say on public health.

I think if Richard Simmons is elected, he should have a new fitness show on C-SPAN where every morning he get's the fat-assed memebers of Congress out of their chairs and makes them sweat through an aerobics routine set to 70's disco hits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stinkyattic

Oh holy AAARGH...!!!!!
Childhood obesity isn't what we elect Congress to deal with. FUCK. Next someone is going to start bitching about a lack of hygiene and next thing you know they'll be making a law about how we should wipe our asses. The government is supposed to handle shit that is too large and too complicated for the people to deal with on a small scale- economic planning, foreign policy, infrastructure- not telling us what to feed our fucking children! This is totally ridiculous- yet ANOTHER red herring tossed out as something for us to fixate on while the school systems themselves are suffering. Yeah.. let's spend more tax money on mandated exercise programs, while the kids go home and vegetate in front of their fucking xboxes. What ever happened to riding Big Wheels with the other neighborhood kids?

---

HELL YEAH! :thumbsup:

These commercials about "playing for an hour a day" are a JOKE! What about the parents telling the kids to get off their asses and do something besides veg behind a box?

Have a good one!:s4:

Ahh man what's next...Rupaul for senate...sheesh:wtf:

The scariest image just came to my mind. It was the picture of Richard Simmons in a tank top and red-white-and-blue shorts sweatin' to the oldies on a mirrored dance floor with Barney Frank. . . . I'm going to have to go watch a horror movie or something to try and shake that vision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gandalf_The_Grey

...they already do have a stake in food standards, as they should. We have institutions like the FDA for a reason (hate the fuckers, but a necessary evil). Food standards can be set up for large-scale, commercial food chains. Initiatives such as trans-fat bans, mandatory nutritional facts, and public education all come in to play.

---

Okay, fine. Educate the public that trans fat is bad for you. That's what the FDA is for. And to keep newly-developed additives from hitting the market before it is determined whether they are harmful.
But once it's approved, and unless they are actually going to yank it from the market (which won't happen because a class action suit against the FDA with every Amercian as a plaintiff on the subject of, say, exposure to trans fats, would be devastating), I don't want to hear whether I am allowed to eat it. Fuck, remember Olestra? Instant taco shits. I never touched the stuff myself and am shocked it got approved as an additive- how did THAT one slip by, lol?
But back to the original point, there's a big difference between saying that xxxx chemical is unsafe and therefore not legal to sell, and mandating that Americans only are allowed to eat fast food xxxx times per month, and never feed it to their fucking kids.
Spend that money on the school science departments, where it matters, because an educated population is a healthy population... we can take care of our damn selves, if we're given the correct tools. Spend a day reading the grow section of any major cannabis forum and you'll see why kids are unhealthy- half of them know jack squat about biology and physiology, and can't be bothered to learn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stinkyattic

Okay, fine. Educate the public that trans fat is bad for you. That's what the FDA is for. And to keep newly-developed additives from hitting the market before it is determined whether they are harmful.
But once it's approved, and unless they are actually going to yank it from the market (which won't happen because a class action suit against the FDA with every Amercian as a plaintiff on the subject of, say, exposure to trans fats, would be devastating), I don't want to hear whether I am allowed to eat it. Fuck, remember Olestra? Instant taco shits. I never touched the stuff myself and am shocked it got approved as an additive- how did THAT one slip by, lol?
But back to the original point, there's a big difference between saying that xxxx chemical is unsafe and therefore not legal to sell, and mandating that Americans only are allowed to eat fast food xxxx times per month, and never feed it to their fucking kids.
Spend that money on the school science departments, where it matters, because an educated population is a healthy population... we can take care of our damn selves, if we're given the correct tools. Spend a day reading the grow section of any major cannabis forum and you'll see why kids are unhealthy- half of them know jack squat about biology and physiology, and can't be bothered to learn.

---

In that case we're on the same page; I'm 100% against government mandating what we can or cannot do with, or put in, our own bodies. I'll bet you've noticed as much as I have the frighteningly fast-growing trend where government, and the voters, are thinking more and more that the state should tell us how to raise our kids. Homeschooling made illegal in California, mandatory anti-depressants for pregnant women in some states... Even here in Canada we see some of the same; the school in my old town actually said they wouldn't let my younger, autistic brother continue getting an education unless we put him on Ritalin. There was an incident in Florida a few years back where 3 second-grade kids were suspended for having "gun fights" with their fingers. The principle in that case said "the other children were frightened" - riiiiight, I remember all-too-well my days of hiding under my desk in terror as kids pointed fingers and said "pow! pow!"


*sigh* society's going to hell in a hand-basket, and folk are looking to big-brother to make it all right.