It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => General Board => Topic started by: Libertas on May 31, 2012, 07:16:43 AM
-
What a anti-American dick! I hope stores band together and sue NYC into bankruptcy!
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/05/30/here-he-goes-again-bloomberg-set-to-ban-all-sugary-drinks-over-16-ounces/ (http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/05/30/here-he-goes-again-bloomberg-set-to-ban-all-sugary-drinks-over-16-ounces/)
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/31/nyregion/bloomberg-plans-a-ban-on-large-sugared-drinks.html?_r=1 (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/31/nyregion/bloomberg-plans-a-ban-on-large-sugared-drinks.html?_r=1)
-
Land of the Free, Home of the Brave. Yeah. Keep telling ourselves that.
We are neither free nor brave.
-
I haven't read the article, so if the answer is obvious, forgive me.
But exactly how does a mayor ban a product? Through executive order?
-
Through the usual way. An infantilized New York City population elects politicians that create things such as Departments of Health and gives those departments full power in directing the mental children under them what they can eat or drink.
New York Times headline, August 14, 2014
Bloomburg directs all New Yorkers to be in bed no later than 10PM.
-
How do the libs do any of the stuff they do? They just do it. Then we, suckers that we are, do things "the right way" and go through the process trying to hold them to account. The process itself can take years and is deliberately stymied and dragged out every step of the way since we long ago ceded control of the bureaucracy and the judiciary to the Left.
We are ill equipped from the very beginning to engage in this sort of fight with the Left, mainly because our fundamental desires are so different. We generally just want to be left alone to live our own lives as we see fit, with a minimum of impediment from the state. That makes us automatically less suited to wage battles of activism. They, on the other hand, live and breathe to use the apparatus of the state as an instrument for the imposition of their ideology on others, it is their central animating characteristic.
This is my long-winded way of saying we get Alinsky'd every time. They do something with no regard to whether or not they "can", and then we try to counter them whilst adhering to all the niceties and decorum of "proper" process, the very stuff they scoff at. As long as our supposed representatives continue to believe this is some gentlemanly parlor game, we are destined to lose.
-
we are talking about NYC
where you have to obey so you don't get a visit in the middle of the night....
-
Like anything Bloomie is pulling this out of his butt and the measure if half-assed...banning sugary drinks over 16oz? Yeah, OK, special on 15oz drinks kiddies! Then he'll lower the size to ridiculous or ban them all outright...
What they can do with one lawful product they can do with any...
We are halfway down the chute already and still there are millions who fail to see the slippery slope...
::facepalm::
::gaah::
-
Well, you know he's only trying to heeeeellllp us, Libertas.
/
All the while he and his cronies are probably stocked for life with Coke or Pepsi.
Or maybe he has a friend in the beverage business that sells smaller, specialty drinks....
why am I suspicious?
-
I hate NY and most people that live there for the obvious reasons so I'm going to suggest that a Mark 41 25mt thermonuclear bomb be detonated 2500 feet above the city.(Yes it's a large one but I want to be absolutely sure no one lives there ever again.) ::rockets::
-
“The idea here is, you tend to eat all the food in the container in front of you,” said Bloomberg. “If it’s a bigger container, you eat more. If somebody put it in a smaller glass or plate or bowl in front of you, you would eat less.”
Bloomberg went on to cite the “epidemic” of obesity in America and said that his is a concrete proposal of what to do about this crisis. He stressed, however, that there would be no limits on the sale of beverages – just their portion size.
“We’re not taking away anybody’s right to do things, we’re simply forcing you to understand that you have to make the conscious decision to go from one cup to another cup,” said Bloomberg.
“It’s not perfect, it’s not the only answer, it’s not the only cause of people being overweight – but we’ve got to do something,” said Bloomberg. “We have an obligation to warn you when things are not good for your health.”
Bloomberg said that there are a variety of activities and substances that are curtailed for public safety. He said that it is illegal for people to enter a room with asbestos, for example. “In New York City, you can smoke,” said Bloomberg. He stressed that one could not do so where they could be endangering anyone that has to work in a given area.
Bloomberg concluded by saying that his administration was hoping to enforce responsibility on consumers. “I would just like to push that from the consumer point of view and force the consumer to hopefully move over to the less fattening drinks and everybody will be better off,” said Bloomberg.
LINK (http://www.mediaite.com/tv/nyc-mayor-bloomberg-on-soda-ban-were-simply-forcing-you-to-understand-whats-better-for-you/)
Force, push, enforce. NUDGE.
Have I said how I hatez these people?
-
Force, push, enforce. NUDGE.
Have I said how I hatez these people?
Not in the last 5 minutes or so. I almost forgot how you hate them. I'm right along there with ya, though.
-
Why not ban American idol. I understand there is a lot of chip eating during the program.....plus, they have those HUGE coke glasses on set.
-
we are talking about NYC
where you have to obey so you don't get a visit in the middle of the night....
If they visited RedNecks in the middle of the night they would start thinkin' different.
-
Well, you know he's only trying to heeeeellllp us, Libertas.
/
All the while he and his cronies are probably stocked for life with Coke or Pepsi.
Or maybe he has a friend in the beverage business that sells smaller, specialty drinks....
why am I suspicious?
You should be suspicious...punitive regulation of all aspects of daily life and the outlawing of independent action let alone thought is for the masses, the ruling elite will have all they desire!
Despise these people I certainly do!
::viking::
-
Guys and gals, I need some help. I'm pitching a new idea for (another) cop series. It will be based in NYC with plenty of action, shooting, bootlegging, black market type stuff , focusing on the brave police and fire who must deal with the consequences of a city ( both its administration and populas) gone mad because its all hyped up on too much Mountain Dew. The star of the series will be a grisled cop, torn between enforcing the new 16oz drink law and his own issues with addiction to Slurpees.
I'm looking for a series name and hey, if you want to assist with a few writing tips, go ahead.
Here are a few ideas:
1) Brown Sugar(less) ( too 70's?)
2) The last straw
3) 16 oz of rain
4) Dentists gone wild
Let me set up the premise for the show so you get the idea of what I want to create.
NYC. Summer....Its hot, you're sweaty and harder and harder to stay out of trouble. Just when you think gov't regulations can't get any more intrusive, Bloomie one ups himself. You're angry, thirsty and that 16 oz drink won't cut it. You walk into the 7 11, jezus christ, only 16 oz drinks...and whats worse, they only carry...diet. But...wait...you've heard of a place where the Coke flows, lines and lines of it. Its bantered about on the street...so you go in search of it...and you find mr bloomies worst nitemare, 32 AND 64 oz cups.
So you grab a cup and you pour the sweet, delicious, syrupy drink, 32 oz...no, 64, hell, why not, this is a safehouse, free from the tyranny of a bloomie gone mad. Who will know?
Little does this lawbreaker understand, but our star ( who needs to play this character?) has a plant in place. A snitch. And this is where the conflict occurs. His "plant" is also our stars source of illegal slurpees, turning on others for arrest while feeding the sugary needs of the very person in charge of wiping this health hazard out of NYC. The snitch has blackmailed the star. It gets dicey. What makes it so intriging is our star, so hyped up on illegal sugar, forgets to read his perps their rights while also so confused, he arrests illegals, which is illegal, who are immediately released.
The force has its concerns as the star shows up at the precinct smelling of Grape ( purple to you blacks) slurpee and his car littlered with illegal cups. While our star is busting sugar abusers, his captain has a Secret Slurpee Squad (SSS, for short), conducting a super secret mission to expose our star.......But the twist in the plot is this: Our "star" is also an illegal, using a fake drivers liscense.
So, does our star have immunity?
Could the captain be arrested for arresting an illegal, posing as a legal??
Could Bloomie give the sugar medal of honor? While arresting our star? Who could then arrest Bloomie for arresting an illegal?
Seriously folks, I hope you can recognize the potential of this thrilling show...This is not just another cop show. I will deal with the cutting edge crime that is turning NYC into a cesspool..... Well, not a cesspool, but whatever a huge vat of sugarry drinks would create.
I need ideas....and a little seed money.
-
Oh, I like it. I can even see a spin-off companion show that is set down in rural Appalachia where illicit soft drinks are made, and then transported up to the city by wily and reckless auto enthusiasts. The principal character in this show would be a charming rogue codenamed by the NYC Grenzschutzpolizei as "Sweet Tooth".
-
Oh, I like it. I can even see a spin-off companion show that is set down in rural Appalachia where illicit soft drinks are made, and then transported up to the city by wily and reckless auto enthusiasts. The principal character in this show would be a charming rogue codenamed by the NYC Grenzschutzpolizei as "Sweet Tooth".
Man. I like the way you think. My spin off was a little different, but I'm sure we could combine the two. In mine, NYC is indunated with advertisments from states down south, inviting them in where there is no state income tax, Nervous Charlies Store will sell you a 64 OZ slurpee AND enough fireworks to launch a space shuttle.
-
Or how about a spin off show that is set in Appalachia where two sons of a Mountain Dew bootlegger square off against the local sheriff and the corrupt politician Boss Bloomberg? Dukes of something or other?
-
Or how about a spin off show that is set in Appalachia where two sons of a Mountain Dew bootlegger square off against the local sheriff and the corrupt politician Boss Bloomberg? Dukes of something or other?
I wouldn't hazard a guess.
-
....speakeasies popping up everywhere. To the rescue, Elliott "Nestle Tea" Gulp.
How about a new movie "Escape from New York II" only this time it's Bloomberg who can't get out of his very own kingdom as he's being hunted down like the scumbag he is by New Yorkers fed up with his bullshyt.
-
....speakeasies popping up everywhere. To the rescue, Elliott "Nestle Tea" Gulp.
How about a new movie "Escape from New York II" only this time it's Bloomberg who can't get out of his very own kingdom as he's being hunted down like the scumbag he is by New Yorkers fed up with his bullshyt.
Yea...instead of sending in snake, we send in the kook aid man...oh yeah.....
-
What stops anyone from buying 2 sixteen once containers? Or bringing their own container?Or buying a two litre bottle? Bung hole.
-
Or buying a two litre bottle? Bung hole.
They'll have to drink it out of a brown paper bag.
-
“It’s not perfect, it’s not the only answer, it’s not the only cause of people being overweight – but we’ve got to do something,” said Bloomberg. “We have an obligation to warn you when things are not good for your health.”
Bloomberg's obligation "to do something" also includes making sure that donated food is not used to feed the homeless. The "homeless" that we are talking about are typically recovering addicts and alcoholics who eat at the city's shelters, and whose personal dietary requirements Bloomberg is quite happy to replace with his own junk science, even if it kills them.
And it will. The donated food being turned away is generally food catered to special events that wasn't served (ie, prepared, and kept ready to serve but unneeded at the event). So it isn't being turned away as "unsanitary," but as unhealthy because it's "party food." But the problem is this: recovering addicts and alcoholics appetites are affected by their disease, and it is much more important to get them to eat than it is to worry about whether or not the food is whole grain or freakin' organic.
So, as far as I am concerned, Bloomberg is a killer, a murderer by foul food.
-
Lilek's article is pretty funny as are the comments (http://www.lileks.com/bleats/archive/12/0612/060512.html)
-
Lilek's article is pretty funny as are the comments (http://www.lileks.com/bleats/archive/12/0612/060512.html)
This is all about power and generating revenue for the growing behemoth that is government at every level...the power hungry types aren't stupid, they know they cannot raise taxes too fast without incurring blowback, so they look to alternative fee-based methods, that our rights get trampled into the ground is of little concern to them beyond a pleasantly-sounding batch of euphemisms to purportedly sell their wicked idea and mask its true intent. If they were more sincere in their bullsh*t reasoning they'd jack the fine up to $2000 just to show how important it is.
-
They even find it necessary to lie about calories in Bloomie's infographic! (http://www.imao.us/index.php/2012/06/bloomberg-busted-in-huge-lie-about-soda-ban/)
Its okay, its not like liberals can do math and notice that as the size doubles the calorie numbers don't.
Its a linear relationship guys. F'ing libtards.
(http://www.imao.us/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/bloomberg-soda-numbers.jpg)
-
Their brains are hard-wired to deflect common sense and logic, only in that construct their actions make any sense.
-
Their brains are hard-wired to deflect common sense and logic, only in that construct their actions make any sense.
Probably not enough sugar in thier diet.
-
What about diet sodas? Will the size ban include these? If not, at most 7-11's you buy a cup, not what you put into it. So I go into the store and fill a 64oz cup with whatever sugary drink I want, when I get to the counter I tell the clerk "It's a Diet Coke". The clerk charges me and I leave. A cop sees me on the corner and asks what I'm drinking, I say "Diet Coke". He wants to verify and says to hand it over. As I'm passing my gigantic drink his way I "accidentally" spill it (maybe even on him) and now he can't fine me since he can't prove that it was indeed the "hard stuff".
What do you think?
-
I think you'll be better off just staying out of NYC.
-
I think you'll be better off just staying out of NYC.
Advice noted... and taken.
-
I think you'll be better off just staying out of NYC.
That's a place that I've never had a moments interest in. At this point I'm not sure you could pay me enough...
-
I think you'll be better off just staying out of NYC.
That's a place that I've never had a moments interest in. At this point I'm not sure you could pay me enough...
Especially since 26K in Atlanta is the equivelant to 120K in NYC.
-
I still find this amazing there are people who support this crap.
NEW YORK — If New York City bans big sodas, what's next on the list? Large slices of pizza? Double-scoop ice cream cones? Tubs of movie-theater popcorn? The 16-ounce strip steak?
The proposed crackdown on super-sized drinks could face a legal challenge from those who oppose the first-in-the-nation rule and fear the city isn't going to stop with beverages.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg wants to bar restaurants, movie theaters, sports arenas, food carts and delis from selling sodas and other sugary drinks in servings larger than 16 ounces, saying it is a way to fight obesity in a city that spends billions of dollars a year on weight-related health problems.
Whether that's legal, though, is a matter of dispute and may be tested.
"We're going to look at all of our options to protect our business, our rights to do business and our rights not to be discriminated against. We won't take anything off the table," said Steve Cahillane, a senior executive with Coca-Cola.
The city Board of Health, appointed by the mayor, is expected to approve the measure after a three-month comment period. It could take effect as early as March, unless the critics who accuse Bloomberg of instituting a "nanny state" can get the courts or state lawmakers to step in.
It's not just businesses and industry groups that could sue. In theory, any individual affected by the ban could bring a legal challenge.
But it wouldn't be enough to simply claim that the ban infringes on personal freedom, said Rick Hills, a New York University law professor specializing in local government law and New York City.
While Bloomberg administration officials say they have no plans to move against solid foods, any local government could ban red meat — or even all animal products — without violating a person's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, Hills argued.
"The court has never struck down a health measure that was designed to protect people from unsafe diets or unsafe foods," he said. Whether the ban is on rat poison or on sugar, government is allowed to protect people from themselves, he said.
And Hills said that opponents would have to do more than argue that the law affects one source of sugar more than others. Courts, he said, have repeatedly ruled that the government can try to eradicate societal ills one step at a time.
Rob Bookman, an attorney who has represented the New York Restaurant Association, predicted opponents will argue that the city Health Department is overstepping its authority and infringing on federal or state power.
He said the sugary-drink rule would set a dangerous precedent: If the ban is within the city's rights, then there's nothing to prevent, for example, a prohibition on the 16-ounce New York strip steak, he suggested.
"We have one federal Food and Drug Administration that determines what products are legal or not legal, or safe for consumption or not safe for consumption," he said. "We cannot have 30,000 or so localities around the country being their own FDAs" without killing the national food industry.
At a Board of Health meeting this week, members seemed to suggest they would, in fact, welcome more expansive measures. Board member Bruce Vladeck asked why the city wasn't considering portion-size limits for buttery movie theater popcorn.
"The popcorn isn't a whole lot better from the nutritional point of view," he said.
In a statement, Health Department spokeswoman Alexandra Waldhorn said the Board of Health's responsibilities include "the control of chronic disease and food service establishments." She added: "Limiting the portion size of sugary beverages served at New York City restaurants is a valid exercise of these authorities."
New York has passed other regulations aimed at making food sold in the city healthier. In 2006, it became the first major city to ban the use of artificial trans fats in restaurant cooking. The ban was not challenged in court, according to the Health Department. And many other cities followed suit.
In 2008, New York city health officials passed a regulation requiring many chain restaurants to post calories on menus. A federal judge rejected a challenge from the restaurant industry, which argued that the rule violated the First Amendment right to free speech by forcing restaurants to "convey the government's message regarding the importance of calories."
Bennett Gershman, a constitutional law professor at Pace University, argued that the ban on big sugary drinks would run afoul of the U.S. Constitution's Commerce Clause.
Local governments "can't pass laws that do impose burdens on the free flow of commerce between states," he said. "If it is too much of a burden, the Supreme Court says that states can't do it. Only Congress can impose burdens on commerce. States can't."
Gershman suggested the measure would impose a burden by requiring out-of-state companies to produce different size drink containers and offer different services for customers in New York.
But Hills scoffed at that line of reasoning, saying the courts have generally accepted such an argument only in regard to transportation rules that might, for example, prevent some trucks from driving across state lines.
___
-
I see some people just need killin' ............
-
"The court has never struck down a health measure that was designed to protect people from unsafe diets or unsafe foods," he said. Whether the ban is on rat poison or on sugar, government is allowed to protect people from themselves, he said.
Uh, there's a problem here: When the government relies on junk science to "protect people" from themselves, they have usurped an authority they do not have and no longer have the implied consent of the governed.
-
"The court has never struck down a health measure that was designed to protect people from unsafe diets or unsafe foods," he said. Whether the ban is on rat poison or on sugar, government is allowed to protect people from themselves, he said.
Uh, there's a problem here: When the government relies on junk science to "protect people" from themselves, they have usurped an authority they do not have and no longer have the implied consent of the governed.
The whole premise is a problem. Government does NOT have the authority to protect people from themselves regardless of the friggin science, good/bad/indifferent.
Governments are instituted among men to protect our Constitutional rights. PERIOD.
-
"The court has never struck down a health measure that was designed to protect people from unsafe diets or unsafe foods," he said. Whether the ban is on rat poison or on sugar, government is allowed to protect people from themselves, he said.
Uh, there's a problem here: When the government relies on junk science to "protect people" from themselves, they have usurped an authority they do not have and no longer have the implied consent of the governed.
The whole premise is a problem. Government does NOT have the authority to protect people from themselves regardless of the friggin science, good/bad/indifferent.
Governments are instituted among men to protect our Constitutional rights. PERIOD.
Of course some statist inevitably comes along and convinces the absolute idiots that "We need to have this" and so that is that. The idiots are the real danger past, present and future to Liberty which must take a back seat to "we know better than you" so stick it.
I state this again hopefully not in vain, only a full blown war can correct the course back towards that of Liberty. Folks, we aren't and haven't been dealing with people that desire freedom to choose as they cannot and will not be held responsible for any possible bad decisions. ::rockets:: ::rockets:: ::rockets:: ::rockets:: ::rockets::
-
Well, we're back to what Pan said...
"I see some people just need killin' "
When government exists solely to enlarge and empower more government to make more decisions that impact individual liberty (that last time I checked were guaranteed in our Constitution and Bill of Rights as derived from our Declaration of Independence and Almighty God himself...any violation thereof being the highest treason)...well, that so many people fail to see it that way shows how deep in the sh*t we've gone and the only way out is fighting back.
Like steep odds?
-
And hey, if Doomberg's Admin needs some more bad ideas it appears his city comptroller is coming thorugh in spades!
Embattled city Comptroller John Liu has delivered a $16.56 million contract to the former vice president’s environmentally friendly investment firm, Generation Investment Management, to help manage hundreds of millions of dollars in city pension funds, The Post has learned.
The Comptroller’s Office had previously awarded Gore’s firm $12.8 million in pension-fund business under Liu’s predecessor, Bill Thompson.
Since 2009, state Comptroller Tom DiNapoli has approved $6 million in contracts to the firm, co-founded and chaired by Gore. Generation now manages nearly a half-billion dollars of state pension-fund investments, records show. In total, that’s more than $35 million in greenbacks to Gore’s firm.
Liu’s office proposes investment-management contracts to the board of trustees of the city’s five major pension funds. Generation is an investment manager for two of them: the New York City Employees Retirement System (NYCERS) and the Police Pension Fund.
But the Gore connection has been a closely held secret.
One NYCERS trustee said he didn’t even know Gore’s firm was a city investment manager.
“That’s been way under the radar. I was unaware of it,” said NYCERS trustee Gregory Floyd, head of Teamsters Local 237.
http://michellemalkin.com/2012/06/18/gore-firm-pension/ (http://michellemalkin.com/2012/06/18/gore-firm-pension/)
Awesome! The Goreacle! ::hysterical:: F.U. NYC! ::mooning:: ::laughonfloor::
-
"The court has never struck down a health measure that was designed to protect people from unsafe diets or unsafe foods," he said. Whether the ban is on rat poison or on sugar, government is allowed to protect people from themselves, he said.
Uh, there's a problem here: When the government relies on junk science to "protect people" from themselves, they have usurped an authority they do not have and no longer have the implied consent of the governed.
The whole premise is a problem. Government does NOT have the authority to protect people from themselves regardless of the friggin science, good/bad/indifferent.
Governments are instituted among men to protect our Constitutional rights. PERIOD.
You are correct! People may think that government's "job" but only because it's been allowed. No one challenged it.
the Board of Health's responsibilities include "the control of chronic disease and food service establishments." She added: "Limiting the portion size of sugary beverages served at New York City restaurants is a valid exercise of these authorities."
::gaah:: ::gaah:: ::gaah::
I would think most people would think disease spread by not washing hands or rats or roaches would be within their allowed responsibilities not whether someone is fat!
I'm sick of these officials that decide the rules then think we have to follow them. They're supposed to work for us!!!
-
Silver lining: If Bloomberg had any presidential aspirations, he'd be completely retarded to believe he'd be viable after this.
-
Hehe. On the eve of its implementation...
Judge Halts New York City Soda Ban (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323826704578354543929974394.html)
A state judge on Monday stopped Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration from banning the sale of large sugary drinks at New York City restaurants and other venues, a major defeat for a mayor who has made public-health initiatives a cornerstone of his tenure.
The city is "enjoined and permanently restrained from implementing or enforcing the new regulations," New York Supreme Court Judge Milton Tingling decided Monday.
The regulations are "fraught with arbitrary and capricious consequences," the judge wrote. "The simple reading of the rule leads to the earlier acknowledged uneven enforcement even within a particular city block, much less the city as a whole….the loopholes in this rule effectively defeat the state purpose of the rule."
-
Gotta luv the NYPost. From the main page:
(http://www.nypost.com/rw/nypost/2013/03/11/news/web_photos/soda2155318--480x180.jpg)
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/mayor_bloomberg_believes_themselves_enfmR96eplT88TyLQInuoI (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/mayor_bloomberg_believes_themselves_enfmR96eplT88TyLQInuoI)
"If you go back to the '20s, you see these pictures of the old robber barons with their big stomachs out to here. That was a sign of success," Bloomberg said.
"Today those people are doing pilates and running in marathons and triathlons and if you look at where obesity is in the country, it tends to be in people at the lower end of the economic ladder (who) don't have the ability to take care of themselves as well.
I don't call him Nanny Bloomingidiot for nothing.
-
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323826704578354543929974394.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323826704578354543929974394.html)
Judge Halts New York City Soda Ban
oops, too late
-
Aside from the propensity for this loathsome idiot to direct the lives of citizens for their own damned good, a really sh*tty aspect of this being overturned is the fact that small business owners have already bought new serving cups, thrown away ones they believed were imminently outlawed, as well as discarding "oversized" soda, and purchasing new "properly sized" inventory.
This is a perfect example of why government needs to get the **** out of the way, every single time.
-
Aside from the propensity for this loathsome idiot to direct the lives of citizens for their own damned good, a really sh*tty aspect of this being overturned is the fact that small business owners have already bought new serving cups, thrown away ones they believed were imminently outlawed, as well as discarding "oversized" soda, and purchasing new "properly sized" inventory.
This is a perfect example of why government needs to get the **** out of the way, every single time.
Now they have legal precedent to sue him personally and or the city of New York. He's got plenty and if the POS is that confident of his authority than he should be willing to pay the price if his idiocy. ::rockets::
-
Got a buddy who has a grandfather in tight with Bloomie, hates it when I go off on that clown, says he's a "moderate", I say "moderate" in that Kruschev was a "moderate" compared to Stalin? Yeah, he's a fricken "moderate"!
::mooning::
-
Got a buddy who has a grandfather in tight with Bloomie, hates it when I go off on that clown, says he's a "moderate", I say "moderate" in that Kruschev was a "moderate" compared to Stalin? Yeah, he's a fricken "moderate"!
::mooning::
Can he provide an example of someone he considers hard-left?
-
Got a buddy who has a grandfather in tight with Bloomie, hates it when I go off on that clown, says he's a "moderate", I say "moderate" in that Kruschev was a "moderate" compared to Stalin? Yeah, he's a fricken "moderate"!
::mooning::
Can he provide an example of someone he considers hard-left?
Usually a dead person, like Ted Kennedy.
I would offer that Bloomie is Ted Kennedy without the trail of alcoholism and drowned dates.
-
Got a buddy who has a grandfather in tight with Bloomie, hates it when I go off on that clown, says he's a "moderate", I say "moderate" in that Kruschev was a "moderate" compared to Stalin? Yeah, he's a fricken "moderate"!
::mooning::
Can he provide an example of someone he considers hard-left?
His grandfather's sister's cousin's roommate? So what....why does he care? It's not as if Grandaddy was part of the policy making. Good grief. ::pokeineye::
-
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-07-30/mike-bloombergs-sugary-drink-ban-thrown-out-appeals-court (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-07-30/mike-bloombergs-sugary-drink-ban-thrown-out-appeals-court)
Bloomie loses, which is nice...but ObamaCare wins...more fatties and diabetics to be enslaved...
::facepalm::
-
Maybe the Nanny will take it all the way to the SCOTUS.
::hysterical::
An appeals court ruled Tuesday that New York City's Board of Health exceeded its legal authority and acted unconstitutionally when it tried to put a size limit on soft drinks served in city restaurants. The state Supreme Court Appellate Division panel upheld a lower court decision that had delayed the measure before it took effect in March. (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-strikes-down-nycs-155155388.html)
-
I doubt it would make it...wouldn't even be accepted for review.
But, that's never stopped morons from trying, has it?!