Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New York City first in U.S. to ban artificial trans fats in restaurant food.
MSNBC ^

Posted on 12/05/2006 8:32:43 AM PST by Smogger

New York City first in U.S. to ban artificial trans fats in restaurant food.

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2muchgovernment; newyork
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-129 last
To: SheLion

Good cartoons.


101 posted on 12/06/2006 4:18:49 AM PST by 383rr (Those who choose security over liberty deserve neither- GUN CONTROL=SLAVERY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Eric Blair 2084

I understand that Jews in Nazi Germany did the same thing: watched their freedom being taken away, living in denial that they were losing their freedom, until it was too late and they faced "the final solution". Government in the U.S. is involved in too many aspects of our daily, private lives. Congress, for example, thinks citizens are too dumb to plan their own retirement or medical care, so it has forced upon us Socialist Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. You MUST participate in all three, either through payroll deduction or taxation.


102 posted on 12/06/2006 5:45:43 AM PST by pleikumud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Piranha

Why? Don't you have any self-control?? Don't want it --Don't Consume it? Whay would we need a law? Geez?


103 posted on 12/06/2006 5:53:46 AM PST by xowboy (My Parents were Right.......Love It or Leave It.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine

Just that it will not stop w/NYC----!!!!


104 posted on 12/06/2006 5:56:09 AM PST by xowboy (My Parents were Right.......Love It or Leave It.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Smogger
New York gets EXACTLY what they want. More government, more control over their lives, more taxes, more laws, etc,etc,etc.

Socialism seems to be what they want, I say give em ALL of it.

105 posted on 12/06/2006 5:58:44 AM PST by unixfox (The 13th Amendment Abolished Slavery, The 16th Amendment Reinstated It !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 383rr
Good cartoons.

They say "a picture is worth a thousand words," right???  :)

106 posted on 12/06/2006 5:59:35 AM PST by SheLion (When you're right, take up the fight!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: oceanview

You should have deliverd your child directly into a glass tube and placed them on the mantle in your home---it's the only place there is NO RISK.


107 posted on 12/06/2006 6:04:01 AM PST by xowboy (My Parents were Right.......Love It or Leave It.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Eric Blair 2084
Well, the solution is obvious - tell them to come for misguided libritarions first, and then brace youslf for the outcry of protest from the hookers, pervs, dope smokers, roid rage iron pumpers, mickey-d's customers and drunks. And oh yes, Howard would probably speak out, but the folks who both 1)listen to him on pay radio and 2) would actually actively protest must number up there in double digits.

Freedom requires responsibility on the part of those who are free. Our government is breaking down to the nanny state you and I hate precisely because of those who are foolish and/or misguided enough to believe freedom means do anything you want. The more you fight to promote debauched irresponsibility the more government intervention we will get. People must grow up and restrain themselves or be restrained. Simple choice.

108 posted on 12/06/2006 6:24:43 AM PST by 70times7 (Sense... some don't make any, some don't have any - or so the former would appear to the latter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: SheLion

Thanks for the ping!


109 posted on 12/06/2006 7:46:54 AM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: 70times7
People must grow up and restrain themselves or be restrained. Simple choice.

Uh.....No, thanks.

110 posted on 12/06/2006 9:51:10 AM PST by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
In case you were not trying to be humorous/sarcastic:

I expect you have absolutely no reservations about driving through a school zone at 70 mph? It would also be no problem for you if I decided to hold a home invasion at your place? Got any nice stuff? (please be sure now to tell me to "come on" so you can shoot me. lol - I plan better than that)

111 posted on 12/06/2006 11:30:15 AM PST by 70times7 (Sense... some don't make any, some don't have any - or so the former would appear to the latter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: 70times7
Your example involves an object actually being used as a weapon.

I see no reference to inanimate objects or consumables.

112 posted on 12/06/2006 5:33:30 PM PST by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: 70times7

I think I understand what you are saying.

If we are going to function as a society and live together, there has to be SOME RULES and boundries. Otherwise we have anarchy. That's the only thought holding me back from being a full blown Libertarian.

Maybe where we differ slightly is my one requirement for functioning in a free society is: DON'T HARM ANYONE ELSE.

And if the Gubmint claims you are harming someone, it better be irrefutable and without question...no junk science or bogus studies about SHS allowed.

Otherwise, liberals can conjure up a multitude of reasons as to why your freedoms should be curtailed.

After all, if that Bacon Double Cheeseburger you're eating causes Type 2 Diabetes you are driving up MY/OUR health care premiums and taxes to pay for your care. Now you are no longer hurting only yourself, you're hurting me too.

That's going to be (is) their argument. The slippery slope just had a 659 gallon bucket of KY dumped on it.


113 posted on 12/06/2006 8:36:53 PM PST by Eric Blair 2084 ("Life is tough. It's tougher when you're stupid."--John Wayne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
Oh, now there are rules against weapons? Silly me. How about if I just walk up and pummel the daylights out of you or someone else just for fun? A person need not restrain a desire for drugs or sex or whatever you say, but if I want to take your stuff then Uh Uh Uhhh, naughty naughty! Why? Because you say "A" is ok, but "B" should be out of bounds?

Tell ya what, when I invade your home if you don't resist I will not shoot you. You may have to put in some overtime to cover the deductable, but file the claim and you will get it all back. Presto - the "victimless crime"! Those are Ok and you should be happy now.

I was discussing the overarching issue of a nanny state government and how we, as a society, bring it on ourselves. You took issue with a particular statement sans context. If you want to limit the discussion to some list that you believe helps your argument have fun; seems pointless to me with such constraints so count me out.

114 posted on 12/07/2006 11:45:32 AM PST by 70times7 (Sense... some don't make any, some don't have any - or so the former would appear to the latter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Eric Blair 2084

Exactly, and those rules and boundries go well beyound what is legal and illegal. Our problem is that too many people now think that good and bad, right and wrong (if they even exist) are deliniated by law and how it can be bent to one's whim. Because of that we are out of control as a society.


115 posted on 12/07/2006 12:01:47 PM PST by 70times7 (Sense... some don't make any, some don't have any - or so the former would appear to the latter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: 70times7

I like the old definition of "crime" - physical or monetary harm to people or property.


116 posted on 12/07/2006 12:31:27 PM PST by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Jaded
The most some of the new schools can do it put stuff in the warming tray.

I know exactly what you're saying, it's really, just, well, weird to see what they serve in the school cafeterias. It's all still-packaged "something" that the kids grab off the piping hot tray and place onto their plate. The lunch lady doesn't even touch the food. Slides the tray into and out of the warmer, that's about it.

My kids bring their lunches, they hate the stuff there. It's just....weird.

117 posted on 12/07/2006 3:15:36 PM PST by momfirst
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
I like the old definition of "crime" - physical or monetary harm to people or property.

Ahh - good. So as long as long as there is no physical harm rape is a-ok. Where in the world did you get that definition? Be careful... with that structure you are placing a lot of responsibility on people to restrain themselves regarding things that are not illegal, but are unacceptable - old definitions and all, don't cha know.

118 posted on 12/07/2006 5:07:11 PM PST by 70times7 (Sense... some don't make any, some don't have any - or so the former would appear to the latter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Smogger

Now I'll feel safer eating non trans-fat buttered popcorn while walking around Harlem at 3 A.M.


119 posted on 12/07/2006 5:11:20 PM PST by toddlintown (Six bullets and Lennon goes down. Yet not one hit Yoko. Discuss.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: momfirst
Last night the TV was droning as I was reading. I didn't bother to turn it off as "The Biggest Looser" was doing a bit regarding overweight high school kids. The trainer reviewed everything that was being served in one high school; pizza, fries, donuts, cinnamon rolls etc. The school said their effort to move to healthier food involved changing to turkey pepperioni on a pizza with wheat crust. Laughable if it wasn't so pathetic. The trainer looked straight into the camera and said there wasn't anything being served that he would eat. For heaven's sake, the vegetable of the day was tater tots.

My kids take their lunches also. Some of their peers who know better are envious at the copious amounts of delicious healthy food they get to consume.

120 posted on 12/07/2006 5:22:10 PM PST by 70times7 (Sense... some don't make any, some don't have any - or so the former would appear to the latter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: 70times7
Ahh - good. So as long as long as there is no physical harm rape is a-ok.

A rape is harm.

Don't be such a brick.

What harm is caused by me not wearing a seatbelt?

121 posted on 12/07/2006 6:13:41 PM PST by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
If there is no physical harm then the harm must be mental. Golly, where to draw the line? If I'm offended by you calling me a brick then you have violated your own laws now haven't you? You want to split hairs but get ticked when the same is handed back. Tisk tisk. Name calling is such a weak argument.

For the record, I have no problem with you not wearing a seat belt. I look at it the same way as I do motor and bicycle helmets - those who do not wear them have noting to protect anyway. I always wear a seatbelt, and always did so long before the law; a law to demand it is irrelevant to me. If you want to gather support round up the hookers, drunks, druggies and pervs to rally round your issue of eroded freedom. They will empathize. I will not. Willful ignorance of the our system of government's requirement for self restraint and responsibility is a big part of what has brought on this nanny state. So those who want to piss into the wind can go right on exercising there right to do so until it is outlawed.

122 posted on 12/07/2006 7:13:01 PM PST by 70times7 (Sense... some don't make any, some don't have any - or so the former would appear to the latter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: 70times7
Willful ignorance of the our system of government's requirement for self restraint and responsibility is a big part of what has brought on this nanny state. So those who want to piss into the wind can go right on exercising there right to do so until it is outlawed.

Finally got you to admit it.

To quote the great Walter E. Williams - "This is not a problem associated with Liberty. It is a problem associated with Socialism."

Tyrants come in all sizes and flavors.

Those who advocate or tolerate tyranny are no better than those who implement it.

Carry on. My children or grandchildren will eventually stop you.

123 posted on 12/07/2006 7:41:10 PM PST by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

Wow, you sure got me there. Kudoos to you. Now run along and work on your reading comprehension. Jeez.


124 posted on 12/07/2006 7:50:36 PM PST by 70times7 (Sense... some don't make any, some don't have any - or so the former would appear to the latter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper

BTW, Discussions like this are the reason for my tagline.


125 posted on 12/07/2006 7:55:31 PM PST by 70times7 (Sense... some don't make any, some don't have any - or so the former would appear to the latter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: 70times7
Now run along and work on your reading comprehension.

Sometimes the truth hurts.

Now run along and work on your Socialist utopia.

What would you like to ban next?

126 posted on 12/07/2006 7:55:59 PM PST by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: 70times7
Discussions like this are the reason for my tagline.

Maybe you should "restrain" yourself from being so clever.

That way, we won't have to employ government guns to do it for you.

127 posted on 12/07/2006 8:04:04 PM PST by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: elkfersupper
Dear lord, you are dense. I don't want a nanny state of government, I hate it. Go back to 108 and read again what you didn't comprehend the first time. I maintain as I have all along that the reason we have one is that people have failed to restrain themselves. (Your response? “no thanks”).

Let me use what I wrote w/ regard to another issue where there are concerns of misdirected legislation; pit bulls:

There is no easy way to deal with irresponsible owners. In a free society there is enormous foundational responsibility to behave properly. The subversion of the standard provided by scripture to the ”me first - screw you” mentality has changed the application of law to our present nanny state system; children do not act responsibly and need a "nanny". So how to apply the law? Aye, there is the rub; because as satisfying as heavy punitive laws can be, they do not bring back a dead kid. So what is left? Ban the breed.

Do I advocate that solution? Of course not. Is that what we will get from legislators who will be more than happy to load restrictions on a situation that the public demands a solution for? Of course it is.

Concentrate, now…We have a press and a legislature that, even on the R side has a heavy dose of arrogance and elitist attitude. We have what sure seems to be an ignorant public that can be easily swayed by lies, sound bytes and half truths. They think Condoleeza Rice is competition for Uncle Ben. Many in our society have grown irresponsible and childish. And then they wonder why the government is growing oppressive. You want to fight tyranny? Fight the tyranny of stupidity. Based on our exchange I sure can recommend a starting point.

128 posted on 12/07/2006 8:26:31 PM PST by 70times7 (Sense... some don't make any, some don't have any - or so the former would appear to the latter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: 70times7
Okay, you're too smart by half.

Rather than fight a trans-fat ban or a smoking ban, or a Twinkie ban as they come up, you would rather just accept those things as a manifestation of stupid, and thereby encourage more stupidity; hoping that society will eventually get it right through legislation or repeal of legislation?.

All the while, the legislation goes on, fueled by hysteria or other motivation.

Sorry, I won't "restrain" myself out of fear that someday there may be a law against ribeyes.

129 posted on 12/07/2006 8:50:11 PM PST by elkfersupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-129 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson