What bothers me is that this won’t bother others.

Mayor Bloomberg now wants to dictate what size iced tea you can buy. I personally don’t drink soda – I just don’t like it – but I hate the ever-expanding encroachment on even small personal liberties. We can’t buy working light bulbs, we can’t use plastic bags, we buckle in before driving, don helmets before riding bikes and on and on and on. All those who derided Chief Justice  Robert’s question during the Obamacare argument, wondering whether the government can force people to buy broccoli now know better. Not that they’ll care.

The Times reports, “The proposed ban would affect virtually the entire menu of popular sugary drinks found in delis, fast-food franchises and even sports arenas, from energy drinks to pre-sweetened iced teas. The sale of any cup or bottle of sweetened drink larger than 16 fluid ounces — about the size of a medium coffee, and smaller than a common soda bottle — would be prohibited under the first-in-the-nation plan, which could take effect as soon as next March.”

RELATED: Bloomberg endorses Charles Rangel, Slurpee poster boy. Rangel is Bloomberg’s kind of politician. ‘Nuff said.


Filed under Uncategorized

38 responses to “What bothers me is that this won’t bother others.

  1. Greenwich Gal

    Most posters know I have been a big Bloomberg fan – but this is downright insanity! Just wrong in every way. If I want to blow myself up with a 48 oz Mountain Dew and chase it with 20 Moon pies it is my own damn business. What’s next – candy? MacDonald’s French fries – how can you not be addicted to those? Trans fat central…. Take away the fois gras at Per Se? – maybe Bloomie might have a problem with protecting an upper echelon vice…

  2. Peg

    Keeping America Safe. What’s up next? Jail time if you purchase more than 2 soft drinks in a day?

    This nanny state crap truly is out of control

  3. AJ

    Bloomberg is here to create utopia. How will we recognize this utopia? When everybody does what he says when he wants without question — that’s how.

  4. HG

    If I am carrying a Big Gulp cup, is that probable cause for a stop-and-frisk? Can the police taste the drink to see if it is diet? Thank God we have solved all the other problems and can focus on whether people are drinking too much soda.

  5. anonymous

    This is just more proof that Nanny Bloomberg is a hopeless liberal and would be a disaster if he were elected to a higher office. I hope Greenwich Gal and other Bloomberg kool-aid drinkers will take notice. He is a menace to liberty and to freedom.

  6. anon

    Personal Responsibility is a lost concept. Today it’s regulations and mandates. Peg hit the nail on the head.

  7. AJ

    PC gone mad? Will making fat jokes and snickering at fatties get you jail time? Will Chris Farley movies become as verboten as old episodes of Amos and Andy? You betcha.

    Should weight-based discrimination be considered a hate crime?

    A new report is suggesting that “appearance-based discrimination” should be added to the hate crimes provision. Should making fun of someone’s weight be considered a hate crime?

    Over in the United Kingdom, a debate is taking place around the possible expansion of what constitutes a hate crime. As Canadians, we should be watching that discussion closely, as it is bound to make its way across the border soon.

    Committing a crime against someone because of their age, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or race is already defined as a hate crime — do we need to expand that definition? A report commissioned by the All Party Parliamentary Group on Body Image and the Central YMCA in the UK is arguing that there needs to be another category added to the parameters of a hate crime: appearance-based discrimination. If the report has the desired effect, the UK Equalities Act would be amended to make harassing someone about their weight or other body appearance a hate crime.

    Body image is a topic that’s on a lot of people’s minds right now. The backlash against airbrushed bodies in magazines and in media is growing, and with obesity rates rising across the world, the way we look is a topic of discussion that draws a lot of interest, and a lot of controversy.

    Should we make harassing someone because of their weight a hate crime here in Canada?

    Yes — and no. A hate crime in this country is…..


  8. Anonymous

    As much as i abhor the ‘nanny state’, people have proven again and again that they are incapable of making smart decisions regarding personal well being. I don’t like sugary drinks and i prefer my coffee black, alas most americans have an insatiable appetite for sugar and fat. look around (preferably outside the white enclaves of fairfield county).

    I have to agree w/ herr bloomberg regarding this.

    **People in the USA need to come to grips with the collective cost associated with obesity.

    **We simple cannot afford anymore to take care of all the people that will have associated health care needs as a direct result of being overweight.


    ps you conveniently or rather not, left out any discussion regarding tobacco use in your rant.

  9. Greenwich Gal

    Excuse me, Anon – did you read my post????

  10. dogwalker

    What leads you to believe that it will not matter to others? Last night on the news (liberal news, not Fox), most people asked said the new rule was going too far.

  11. Anonymous

    i do not cheer this attempt of enacting legislation.

    it’s a problem in certain communities and cultures.

    please address how this is different from tobacco use or even pot use.

    outlawing a plant is ‘nanny state’ no ?

    • Yes, it’s an outgrowth of applying punitive taxes on tobacco and, like that tax, represents just another expansion of state control over individual lives. The “costs to society” argument justifies every possible activity a doogooding-meddler can dream up, from mandating scarfs and galoshes during inclement weather to hours children can watch television or, as this law demonstrates, what adults can eat. There was a time when citizens’ actions were proscribed only when they negatively affected another 0 your right to swing your arm stops at my nose, for example. Now that we’re providing or subsidizing healthcare, education, highways, the Internet – everything, there is no limit to state control under your argument.

  12. anonymous

    Greenwich Gal,

    Yes, I read your post. And, i read your post several weeks ago where you defended Bloomberg and said he should be President. You flip flop more than an elected official.

  13. Anonymous

    Please come up with a solution to help combat obesity ?

    akin to coming up with a solution to get guns off of streets, people are opposed to stop and frisk, yet do not have any ideas about mitigating the problem.

  14. AJ

    Odd that Bloomberg thinks diet soda is the good stuff: just Google diet soda kidney disease, also odd that GMO corn in soda doesn’t seem to bother him, nor does the use of human stem cells as flavor enhancement in soda: http://www.naturalnews.com/035276_Pepsi_fetal_cells_business_operations.html
    It’s nice to see that Anon @ 10:58 appreciates the goverment’s concern and desire to chaperone all of us who are too stupid to make our own decisions; his logic is flawed however in regards to fat people costing the health system more. Most fatties just keel over and drop dead racking up no medical costs whereas healthy people deteriorate at a much slower, prolonged pace, costing the system hundreds of thousands — I’ll bet you’ll not find many fatties in Nathaniel Witherell.
    I believe, however, I do have a solution to the imaginary cost of the fat people, burden on society problem: let’s have Bernie Madoff and Al Gore (sorry Kenny Boy Lay that you’re going to have to miss this one) set up a health — fresh — food tax credit that can be traded for cash (to encourage poor people who don’t pay any tax) on an open market so that we can cherish our fat friends and profit from having them around.

  15. Peg

    “As much as i abhor the ‘nanny state’, people have proven again and again that they are incapable of making smart decisions regarding personal well being. I don’t like sugary drinks and i prefer my coffee black, alas most americans have an insatiable appetite for sugar and fat. look around (preferably outside the white enclaves of fairfield county).
    I have to agree w/ herr bloomberg regarding this.”

    Then why stop at Big Gulps?

    Dozens of desserts can make you fat. Pizza. Prime rib. Candy, pasta, bagels and cream cheese. Frankly – just eating too much food period can do it. So – what’s the answer? The Fat Police come out once a week and weigh you? If you’re not within the proper body fat standards, fines – or, jail time?

    Plus – as we all know, plenty of otherdetails of life can make a person less healthy. Let’s monitor how much sleep people get every week. Let’s outlaw motorcycles, mountain climbing, race car driving and hundreds of other activities that are more dangerous and less healthy than others. Nanny state, indeed.

  16. Libertarian-Conservative

    …and to think “anonymous” above reflects perfectly the statist views of a certain “conservative” Republican Convention delegate from G’wich.

  17. Anonymous

    “his logic is flawed however in regards to fat people costing the health system more. Most fatties just keel over and drop dead racking up no medical costs whereas healthy people deteriorate at a much slower, prolonged pace, costing the system hundreds of thousands”

    this is wrong.

    i invite you do do some research and perhaps listen to people that have dedicated their careers in this field.


  18. Greenwich Gal

    I guess you can’t be gracious when someone admits to the liabilities of someone they previously supported. Are you that much of a total douchebag?…

  19. Anonymous

    everyone here has completely missed what is happening! I think this is a way to offset the many tax breaks and advertising dollars and lobby groups that push their unhealthy products. As the healthier foods get less play time. It may have the result as telling us what to do. But, we all need to lift up the skirt and understand we are ALREADY being told what to do by BIG FOOD companies. There is a reason why in europe they have much higher food stands ie banning corn syrup. Lets all put on our thinking caps regarding foods that are pushed or legislated and not be SO offended and judged. There is an intellectual arterial motive here. This all boils back to the power of the lobby and big business and NOT personal decision making.. For instance, the way they withhold ingredients and its effects. This is similar to the the original fights and whistle blowers on cigarettes.

    • Your reference to corn syrup just proves the point: sugar is sugar, as any doctor/nutritionist will tell you. No better, no worse than any other form, cane or beet. You’re being fed bullshit, alright, but your server is the sensationalist press and the loony crowd. Relax and have an apple fried in transfats.

  20. Although I do like the movement to list calorie counts on menus, I disagree with this latest idea. I grew up with a family that always bought the largest size soft drink so that we could share it in order to save money. We’d do that at the movies, at Playland, or at fast food restaurants. If we weren’t allowed to save money in that way, we would have had to spend much more on 5 small sodas or whatever. Looking back, it’s amazing that we could all enjoy (or tolerate) the same flavor of soda. Even though we were a family of 5, who is to say that a couple on a date won’t be sharing a milkshake, a la Dobie Gillis days? Even now, I sometimes get the biggest size of cappucino in the morning, and end up finishing it at home after a long day. Who is to say that my serving is too big, when it might replace a refill or second serving?
    I do appreciate that the calorie requirements may someday help me get my weight in better check, I don’t think that size limits on sodas are fair to those who share or save their beverage to finish later.
    By the way, there’s an art opening at the Sam Owen Gallery tonight. It looks like there’s a horse theme again, so I’m sure to hit it. Naaaay!

  21. Anonymous

    Chris, ask yourself what the healthiest athletes eat or what a nutritionist recommends. We should be well educated on what decisions we are making and the health implications of our decision. Then the pre-decision and gov’t involvement wouldn’t be necessary. So, then why is that information hard to ascertain??? Bottom line, there is a vast difference the way these items breakdown in your body. An apple is not a candy bar. Think about what is in your hot dog and would you really eat it if it said on the outside of the package – leftover body parts. There is a blanket of secrecy that is belongs to our puritan ways.

  22. Cos Cobber

    For those in favor of the sugar laws, why is Bloomy stopping with soda, why not go after cotton candy, candy bars, popsicles and ice cream? Fried foods need to be aggressively deterred as well.. Same with faddy cuts of meat; beef hot dogs should be capped at 2 per month! And fruit juice, you have just been put on notice!

  23. Anonymous

    At least herr bloomberg is doing something about how fat we have become.

    doing something is a little better than doing nothing. And the soft drink beverage lobby is an enormous lobbying group.

  24. Greenwich Gal

    We are depriving our country of the benefits of natural selection! I am fine with idiots who kill themselves as it strengthens the species… Hopefully, we won’t have to pay for their healthcare.

  25. Anonymous

    If you really wanted to stop obesity try letting health insurers charge on risk.

  26. pulled up in OG

    “A majority of schools have exclusive marketing agreements with [soda] companies — almost 75 percent of high schools, 65 percent of middle schools, and 30 percent of elementary schools.”

  27. AJ

    “….please address how this is different from tobacco use or even pot use. outlawing a plant is ‘nanny state’ no ?”

    This is what’s known as “begging the question”, a type of logical fallacy in which a proposition is made that uses its own premise as proof of the proposition. In other words, it is a statement that refers to its own assertion to prove the assertion. Such arguments are essentially of the form “a is true because a is true” though rarely is such an argument stated as such. –Wikipedia

    Of course, the reason that they’re already doing it is a good reason to do more and more and more until your every move must be watched for your own good. Please bend over, we must insert your RFID.

    Oh the cost, the cost! Why don’t we all run around like chickens with their heads cut off, worrying about nickles and dimes while the Fed sneaks a quadrillion of your tax dollars out the back door to pay for a bunch of degenerate gamblers known as banksters who bet the farm and lost. This is all a distraction to keep you from noticing that you’re being taken to the cleaners and robbed blind. Time to go hold hands with Soledad O’brien and Erin Burentt and do our best to look oh so concerned, oooooh. You are hereby ordered to have your jaws wired shut, be confined to a liquid diet, and undergo bariatric surgery.

  28. Anonymous

    Does anyone appreciate the irony that tomorrow, Mayor Bloomberg is helping to celebrate National Doughnut Day with an official proclamation?

  29. AJ

    Soda is bad; donuts are good? Am I the only one smelling an Obama style backroom deal? Do I hear any bids for national donut day; who wants to be a sponsor?

  30. AJ

    “At least herr bloomberg is doing something about how fat we have become”?

    Yes, as with a sympathetic cough, Bloomberg displays how aligned he is with our concern that the fat guy down the street might end up costing us money by showing us just how how fat his head is. Has he even stopped to think that now these fatties are going to have to use extra cups to consume their daily quota. Has he not thought of the resulting increased carbon footprint?

  31. Anonymous

    anyone have any real suggestions to help curb the countries obesity epidemic ?

  32. HG

    Anon@12:23, my suggestion is to keep printing money. I believe in 1921, farmers in Germany simply stopped shipping food into the cities.

  33. dogwalker

    HG, You’re on the right track, but what we need is a twist on that . . . it is the food manufacturers/processors/whatever who need to stop shipping, with the farmers (particularly veggie/fruit growers) doubling or tripling production!