Liberalism is a Mental Disorder (AKA Politics Suck)

A blog dedicated to holding our politicians accountable to We The People.

Saturday, December 09, 2006

Didnt believe me that your rights are slowly being eroded?

So, here is a little tidbit that did not get a lot of MSM play. Your rights are slowly being eroded folks. First it was a smoking ban, because the do-gooders believe that they know what is best for your health instead of letting you make personal choices, then it was more taxes on cigarettes...now, we have New York officially banning trans-fats, telling mom and pop what to do and how to do it, instead of letting the free-market make the choice, such as what KFC did.

WAKE UP AMERICA WTF is wrong with you?

From ABC News:

NYC Bans Trans Fats From Eateries

By JOCELYN NOVECK AP National Writer

NEW YORK Dec 5, 2006 (AP)— New York on Tuesday became the first city in the nation to ban artery-clogging artificial trans fats at restaurants, leading the charge to limit consumption of an ingredient linked to heart disease and used in everything from french fries to pizza dough to pancake mix.

In a city where eating out is a major form of activity either for fun or out of hectic necessity many New Yorkers were all for the ban, saying health concerns were more important than fears of Big Brother supervising their stomachs.

"I don't care about what might be politically correct and what's not," said Murray Bader, nursing a cup of coffee at Dunkin' Donuts on Tuesday morning. "I want to live longer!"

The 72-year-old Manhattan resident called the ban a "wake-up call" for a public often unaware of the risks of artificial fats. "This stuff clogs up your vessels," he said. "When it comes to health, we only have one life."

Toni Lewis, catching a quick dinner at McDonald's before her daughter's piano lesson on the eve of the vote, acknowledged that yes, it might be an intrusion for the city to tell people what they can and can't put into their stomachs. But, she added, it was a welcome one.

"This is New York," she said. "People eat out a lot. We don't have a choice. We need someone to make it a healthier proposition."

Health and nutrition groups say artificial trans fats clearly contribute to heart disease. Studies have shown they raise bad cholesterol and lower the good kind. Partially hydrogenated vegetable oil, the main form of artificial trans fats, is used for frying and baking and turns up in a host of processed foods: cookies, pizza dough, crackers and pre-made blends like pancake mix.

"It's basically a slow form of poison," said David Katz, director of the Yale Prevention Research Center. "I applaud New York City, and frankly, I think there should be a nationwide ban."

Not everyone agrees with Katz he's gotten angry e-mails calling him and colleagues the "food police" and saying, "If I want to eat trans fats, that's my inalienable right." To which he responds: "Would you want the burden of asking your restaurant whether there's lead in the food? Whether there's arsenic in the bread? For all I know, maybe arsenic makes bread more crusty. But it's poison."

Some industry representatives were not happy. E. Charles Hunt, executive vice president of the New York State Restaurant Association, said the city had overstepped its authority by ordering restaurants to abandon an ingredient permitted by the FDA.

"This is a legal product," he said. "They're headed down a slippery slope here."

The Board of Health, which passed the ban unanimously, did give restaurants a minor break by relaxing the proposed deadline. Restaurants will now be barred from using most frying oils containing the fats by July 2007 and will have another year to eliminate them from all foods.

The ban, which was advocated by health-conscious Mayor Michael Bloomberg, follows a national requirement beginning this past January that companies list artificial trans-fat content on food labels. Efforts are also being made to reduce the trans-fat content of snacks in school vending machines.

The New York ban does not affect grocery stores. Nor does it apply to naturally occurring trans fats, which are found in some meats and dairy.

It's the danger a bad diet poses to children that has experts the most worried. It's also what worries Kathy Ramirez, a 26-year-old New York mother who takes her toddler to McDonald's every week. She approves of the ban and a related measure passed Tuesday, requiring restaurants that already disclose calorie counts mostly chain restaurants to post them right on the menu.

"It's hurting us, all this fat, but the kids really like it," said Ramirez, pointing to 3-year-old Amber, who'd just finished her dinner. "It would be better to know what we're getting."

(McDonald's Corp. has been experimenting with healthier oil blends but has not committed to a full switch yet, though it has said it will be ready for a New York City ban. Wendy's International Inc. introduced a zero-trans fat oil in August, and Yum Brands Inc.'s KFC and Taco Bell said they also will cut trans fats from their kitchens.)

At Le Perigord, a tony, sedate French restaurant favored by diplomats from the nearby United Nations, owner Georges Briguet is a big fan of the trans-fats ban, and even says he'd consider putting calorie counts on his own upscale menu though it's only chains with standardized items that would be affected.

"In this country there are so many obese people it really is a disgrace," Briguet said. "It's important for the health of the population to ban these artificial fats. When I was growing up in France, my mother never even gave me a french fry. We don't have a fryer here. We just saute our potatoes in some good butter."

The mayor, Briguet added, "is just as responsible for the health of someone eating the wrong food as for someone who kills himself smoking." Bloomberg banned smoking in New York's bars and restaurants during his first term.

The public acceptance of that smoking ban, which at the time was a major source of worry to restaurant owners, shows why food chains should embrace the current New York ban, said Tim Zagat, founder of the popular Zagat Survey.

"You can't put lead in your food, right? With trans fats, you're not going to die as fast, but they are clearly bad for you and people don't even know when they're eating them," Zagat said.

"If I were a restaurant, I would comply as quickly as I possibly could," he said. "Some fast-food chains are in the middle of the railroad track right now. They'd better rethink their business models. This is the next big issue in the United States."

Associated Press writer David B. Caruso contributed to this report.


New York, the bastian of liberal politcs and Shrillary Clinton. It doesnt surprise me that they found some folks who are all for falling to the ground and letting the Government walk all over them. Its individuals like this who are a danger to not only our heritage of having free choice, but also to our individual liberties which are a cherished birthright and makes America the great land that she is.

SO WHAT if people make unhealthy choices...ITS THEIR DAMN BODIES..stay OUT OF IT! And I love what this woman said:

Toni Lewis, catching a quick dinner at McDonald's before her daughter's piano lesson on the eve of the vote, acknowledged that yes, it might be an intrusion for the city to tell people what they can and can't put into their stomachs. But, she added, it was a welcome one.

"This is New York," she said. "People eat out a lot. We don't have a choice. We need someone to make it a healthier proposition."

Ummm, excuse me Mrs Lewis, if that is your REAL name, instead of stopping at Mickey D's, how about you drive or better yet WALK your happy ass down the street to Subways or make the decision YOURSELF (GASP!! THE HORROR OF HAVING TO MAKE YOUR OWN DECISIONS) and walk or drive to the nearest health food place that doesnt USE trans-fats. You DO have a choice lady...this is America...REMEMBER?

Again..WAKE THE F**K UP AMERICA...STOP LETTING THE GOVERNMENT DO-GOODERS TAKE OUR RIGHTS FROM US! YOU may think you are doing a good thing passing that proposition to ban smoking, or increase taxes on a small segment of the population, or voting in a socialist...but you are doing nothing but EVENTUALLY ERODING YOUR RIGHTS, THE RIGHTS OF YOUR CHILDREN, AND THE RIGHTS OF GENERATIONS TO COME.


Labels: , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

What?? It's not a "choice" to eat out?? Yes it is! Go to the grocery store, buy healthy foods, make your meal to go, put it in a freakin paper bag and keep a cooler in your freakin car! Don't drive? Make a meal that doesn't need refrigeration. I can't believe people are rolling over for this! If I were in charge of one of those fast food places, I'd take my business elsewhere. If they all did that, NYC would loose A LOT of money.
I will definitely NEVER move to or now even visit NYC. This is really the stupidest thing I have ever seen!

09 December, 2006 11:00  
Anonymous Ivy said...

laws against TRANSFAT??? Next we will have laws against white bread and peanut butter!

I am for smoking laws only because I don't want to smell like someone elses cigarette stink :) but you can be as fat as you want to. http://tinyurl.com/y8ffd4

09 December, 2006 11:53  
Blogger LiberalismIsAMentalDisorder said...

Vet...hear hear

IVY...why would you be for anything that erodes ANYONES rights?

Everyone...dont worry about the tinyurl address, its all good

09 December, 2006 12:23  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great post! I said what you just wrote years ago with seatbelt legislation, then again I said it when they began making cigarettes the big issue, now it’s our food. It won’t end until most folks understand that leftists want complete control of your mind, body, and soul! And this doesn’t really dawn on most folks until something dear to them is suddenly “forbidden”.

10 December, 2006 08:56  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let me get this straight... you stand by and witness the government enacting warrentless wire-taps, the suspension of habeas corups, warrentless data mining, american citizens being held without being charged, and you don't say a thing. But when a local government decides to target trans-fats, (don't get me wrong its a stupid law and the money would be better spent on an information campaign about the dangers of transfats) its treated as a huge issue. You're worrying about the housecat when the lion's right behind you. Many rights more important than the right to eat a big mac are being trampled on. You'd be doing the nation a better service focusing on those.


11 December, 2006 02:41  
Blogger LiberalismIsAMentalDisorder said...

Nick...The suspension of habeus corpus is a misnomer....on one of the liberal boards I used to frequent, even the resident lawyer got disgusted that people were not understanding. I would love to explain it to you, but the posting has long since gone into the archives, but suffice it say that habeus corpus is not dead.

As to the warrantless wire taps et all, all I can say is that no american is directly affected by it, show me a case wheren an americans citizens rights were trampled on unfairly utilising the patriot act or any other tools we have been using to cut the islamofascists off at the pass, and I will agree with you.

This issue directly affects all of us.

11 December, 2006 05:48  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jose Padilla. A native-born American, captured on American soil, who was held without being charged for years, violating his constitutional and human rights.

As for the warrentless wiretaps? the NSA moniters hundreds of calls a day, according to an article I read in Time Magazine. Those hundreds of people a day are having their rights violated, even if they don't know it. There are also cases I've heard of where the FBI tries to seize financial or library records without a warrent. That's not how it should work.

Oh, and you're thinking of the wrong habeas corpus infrigement. In september of this year, congress passed the Military Commissions Act (not the one your laywer friend was referring to) that specifically does suspend habeas corpus in some cases.


11 December, 2006 10:48  
Blogger LiberalismIsAMentalDisorder said...

Nick...I am not nitpicking...but can you point me to an honest article/study as to what he was being held for? I suspect it was for valid reason.

I havent read the military commissions act yet, so I will have to defer to people who know about it and take it at face value until I can prove otherwise.

11 December, 2006 14:55  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I can tell you myself, and if you don't trust me, i can dig up some news articles. He was originally held, accordidng to the official reports, on suspicions of planning to detonate a dirty bomb. I stand corrected, he has now been charged a few YEARS later, with conspiracy "murder, kidnap and maim" people overseas. But regardless of why, he was denied his constitutional rights. He was an american citizen captured on american soil deprived of his rights under the american constitution.

here's the wikipedia page on jose padilla http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Padilla_%28alleged_terrorist%29

Here's a summery of the military commissions act.


What, may I ask, is the face value you're taking it as?


12 December, 2006 12:45  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home