The F$$d P$lice are C$ming

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
the iron horse said:
High Fructose Corn Syrup is one ingredient in foods
I wish the Food Police would ban, but I doubt they will.
Too much $$$ being made.

Another alarm on HFCS:
US Autism Spike Linked To High-Fructose Corn Syrup � The Talk Radio News Service

Why do you believe in the food police in some cases but not others? I thought you believed in moderation of all things? Seems hypocritical doesn't it?

Or maybe another question, why do you believe this science and not the science that links smoking to cancer?
 
Or maybe another question, why do you believe this science and not the science that links smoking to cancer?

I haven't read every post the guy's made, but seriously, there are actually still people out there who don't believe smoking causes cancer? I refuse to believe anyone is that dense.
 
George Will on NYC soda ban: ‘The essence of contemporary liberalism,’ ‘preposterous,’ ‘sinister’ | The Daily Caller

George Will on NYC soda ban: ‘The essence of contemporary liberalism,’ ‘preposterous,’ ‘sinister’


New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is taking a lot of heat for his move to combat obesity by banning the sale of large carbonated beverages in his city.

The latest criticism comes from Washington Post columnist George Will, who explained on Sunday’s broadcast of ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” why Bloomberg’s move represents the flaws of liberalism.

“Let me read what Michael Bloomberg said. because in one sentence he’s got the essence of contemporary liberalism — that is something preposterous and something sinister,” Will said. “Listen to this: ‘We’re not taking away anyone’s right to do things.’ Could have fooled me. “We’re simply forcing you to understand.’ Now, that’s modern liberalism — the like of bossing people around, the kind of irritable gesture.”

I miss a lot of news during Indy 500 week including this but I'll expand on Mr Will's comments.

This is an example of liberal fascism for those of you that scoffed at Jonah Goldberg's book title of a few years back. Whether the soft tyranny of the Nanny State or the totalitarianism of a N Korea, any philosophy that promotes a utopian vision of "experts" and "the ruling class" over individual choice and free enterprise requires some degree of, as the Mayor so eloquently states, "forcing you to understand."
 
Now, that’s modern liberalism — the like of bossing people around

Riiiight, because only liberals do that.

That's not modern liberalism - that's politics. Or would you like to try and argue that conservatives don't try to push their views on others?
 
Riiiight, because only liberals do that.

That's not modern liberalism - that's politics. Or would you like to try and argue that conservatives don't try to push their views on others?

Thank you.

And for the record, I think the soda ban is stupid. Jon Stewart had a great rant about it on "The Daily Show" the other night.
 
I think it's stupid too. Even though no human needs to drink that much soda, if you still choose to well it should be your choice. You could always buy a bunch of smaller ones and drink them all at once. So it just seems silly and pointless to me, not fascist. NYC must be a blissful utopia, if the mayor is so fixated on big gulps.
 
Riiiight, because only liberals do that.

That's not modern liberalism - that's politics. Or would you like to try and argue that conservatives don't try to push their views on others?

Conservatives advocate and discuss.

Liberals seek to make the law suit their own particular prejudice, and enforce it onto others.

Big difference.
 
They're only advocating and discussing that women surrender all privacy about their vaginas. Just for starters.

:lol:

I appreciate their advice and counsel so much :hug:
 
Conservatives advocate and discuss.
I haven't found this to be true, not in real life, and especially not in here.

There's a reason echo chambers like talk radio don't work on the left.


Liberals seek to make the law suit their own particular prejudice, and enforce it onto others.

Hmmm, right... So when it came to women's rights, marriage equality, and pretty much every social issue of the last century it was conservatives on the right side of history? It wasn't conservatives seeking to make the law suit their own biases?

I'll have to remember that.
 
Why do you believe in the food police in some cases but not others? I thought you believed in moderation of all things? Seems hypocritical doesn't it?

Or maybe another question, why do you believe this science and not the science that links smoking to cancer?

I don't know anything about the person you're responding to, but I will say that HFCS is bad for you and there is a lot of science to prove it (look up the countless studies done on its effects, if I remember to I'll come back with some links later). I don't think it should be banned per say, but I do think it should be restricted. There needs to be some law against putting it in everything. Seriously, it's in everything. It's in bread. It's in ketchup. Why?

I switched out a bunch of staple foods that had HFCS in them to alternatives without HFCS (bread, milk, snacks) and I noticed a huge difference in how I felt within a month.
 
I don't know anything about the person you're responding to, but I will say that HFCS is bad for you and there is a lot of science to prove it (look up the countless studies done on its effects, if I remember to I'll come back with some links later). I don't think it should be banned per say, but I do think it should be restricted. There needs to be some law against putting it in everything. Seriously, it's in everything. It's in bread. It's in ketchup. Why?

I was mainly questioning this poster on his inconsistent stances.

And I thought that particular link was pretty weak on real science and evidence. I mean how does one deny the overwhelming evidence that smoking is bad for you, yet fall completely for that article?

I'm fairly aware of the evidence that HFCS is bad for you.
 
Since when is Bloomberg the essence of modern liberalism?

Thanks for another dispatch from inside the bubble.
 
Isn't Bloomberg at most a 'moderate' and has not he had associations with the GOP?

But, back to his new proposal, most likely a loser for him. Sure he is right. But where does government draw the line.

If a tall skinny guy wants to drink a big gulp, who cares.

We do have 'sin' taxes on alcohol and tobacco. Many consumer products contribute significantly to obesity and diabetes health problems and costs.
 
Perhaps the wailing and sobbing over not getting one's diary drink while at the same time seeking to deny cancer patients and MS sufferers medical marijuana is the heart of modern day conservativism? Or states with the highest rates of divorce, infidelity, and out-of-wedlock births -- not to mention some who include all african-american piverty -- blaming such things on gay people?
 
Riiiight, because only liberals do that.


That's not modern liberalism - that's politics. Or would you like to try and argue that conservatives don't try to push their views on others?

Conservatives are not libertarians but it's no coincidence that the banning of table salt, trans fats, Big Gulps, school bake sales and Happy Meals is being initiated in Blue America (New York City, Massachusetts and San Francisco).
 
and family friendly Disney


600


Disney's new diet for kids: No more junk food ads

The Walt Disney Co. has become the first major media company to ban junk-food advertising on programming that targets children.

Building on a healthy-foods initiative in its theme parks, Disney imposed new standards for food and beverages advertised on Disney XD and during the Saturday morning programs on Disney-owned ABC television stations. Disney Channel and Disney Junior, which are not ad-supported but receive brand sponsorships, would also be covered under the nutrition guidelines, officials said.

Kanter Media, a research firm specializing in advertising, estimated the total amount of ad spending for this kind of advertising on Disney-owned channels and Saturday morning children's programming on ABC totaled $7.2 million in 2011.

First Lady Michelle Obama, who has made fighting the childhood obesity epidemic and promoting healthy eating a hallmark of her time in the White House, praised Disney's initiative at a Tuesday morning news conference at the Newseum in Washington.

"This new initiative is truly a game-changer for the health of our children," Obama said. "So, for years, people told us that no matter what we did to get our kids to eat well and exercise, we would never solve our childhood obesity crisis until companies changed the way that they sell food to our children. We all know the conventional wisdom about that. ... Today, Disney has turned that conventional wisdom on its head."

Six years ago, Disney instituted healthier food options at its theme parks in Anaheim and Orlando, Fla., automatically including carrots and low-fat milk in children's meals unless parents requested otherwise. Its consumer products division changed its licensed food program so that 85% of its offerings comply with the company's nutrition guidelines. It even chose to stop licensing its characters for McDonald's "Happy Meals," citing the links between fast food and childhood obesity.

Food and beverage advertisers who seek to promote their products on Disney Channel or Disney XD will be required by 2015 to meet guidelines regarding serving size, calories, fat and sugar content. The guidelines are aligned with federal standards promoting fruit and vegetable consumption and calling for limiting calories and reducing saturated fat, sodium and sugar.


"We've taken steps across our company to support better choices for families," Disney Chairman and Chief Executive Robert A. Iger said in a statement. "And now, we're taking the next important step forward by setting new food advertising standards for kids."

Obama said kids are exposed to food and beverage marketing that adds up to an estimated $1.6 billion a year, including many ads for foods that are high in calories and sugar but low in nutrition.

"Our kids are constantly bombarded with sophisticated messages designed to sell them foods that simply aren't good for them," Obama said. "And let me tell you, we know it works, right?"

Many parents make the effort to prepare nutritious meals and healthy snacks, Obama said, but when kids turn on their favorite shows, those efforts are undermined during the commercial break.

"That's why I am so thrilled about today's announcements," she said. "I am thrilled that Disney is stepping forward in such a big way."

Obama has used other children's television networks to get out her healthy-living message. Last year, she joined in Nickelodeon’s Worldwide Day of Play, an effort to get kids involved in healthy activities and away from the TV for at least three hours a day..

Disney bans junk-food advertising on programs for kids - latimes.com
 
Conservatives are not libertarians but it's no coincidence that the banning of table salt, trans fats, Big Gulps, school bake sales and Happy Meals is being initiated in Blue America (New York City, Massachusetts and San Francisco).

Well is it a coincidence that "Red America" is targeting minorities, allowing killers who shot their victim in the back set free because they claimed "stand your ground", or drafting up sodomy laws?

Is this coincidence or just bettering Amerika?
 
INDY500 said:
George Will on This Week surrounded by Democratic operatives like George Stephanopoulos (Clinton), Donna Brazile (Gore) and Stephanie Cutter (Obama) is "inside the bubble"?



Yes. Did you read the quote you posted?
 
Disney too?

Has anyone considered that this is the free market, i.e. glorious capitalism, at its finest? That maybe fatty foods full of sugar are being tossed by the wayside because the public is becoming more and more familiar with proper nutritional requirements and is starting to demand lower calorie foods?

Years ago when I started working at the firm, at our lunch seminars you'd see cans of pop, juice and the water that was always available (not bottled). Half diet pop, half regular. They all went. Fast forward to this year - the first half of the attendees took all the Diet Coke, the remainder, save for one or two people, opted for filtered tap water rather than the sugared stuff. Today? You probably have a 80/20 split in favour of the diet stuff on the tables. Food police or free market choices at work?
 
Yet it's not the public deciding this; it's the government. I haven't seen a drop in fast food sales lately.

edit: referring to the bans and extra taxes on fatty/bad foods; not to disney.
 
Disney too?

Has anyone considered that this is the free market, i.e. glorious capitalism, at its finest? That maybe fatty foods full of sugar are being tossed by the wayside because the public is becoming more and more familiar with proper nutritional requirements and is starting to demand lower calorie foods?

Food police or free market choices at work?

When Wendy's and others start to offer salads, wraps and diet sodas... that's a for-profit corporation responding to market demands.

When a government official bans sodas of a certain size, Happy Meals or Ding Dongs & Twinkies in the school lunch room... that's the food police.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom