San Francisco Officially Has No Soul.....

[Obama 2012 1,714]

[The_Dude 1,142]

You're rehashing this old argument paul? Seriously, when they make regulations that are for the benefit to people on the whole, it's not a bad thing. You can still buy a happy meal for yourself and give it to your kid and you can dump an entire quarry worth of salt on it if you like, because you have the right to. That doesn't mean that government should try to look out for the health of it's citizens. Sorry paul, this isn't an example of bad government.

Edit to add: Could this have anything to do with the fact that San Francisco Giants completely destroyed the inept Rangers?

Edited November 4, 2010 by Rob & Mel

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It's typical Paul hyperbole. First it's Happy Meals, tomorrow THE WORLD!!!

[Obama 2012 1,714]

You're rehashing this old argument paul? Seriously, when they make regulations that are for the benefit to people on the whole, it's not a bad thing. You can still buy a happy meal for yourself and give it to your kid and you can dump an entire quarry worth of salt on it if you like, because you have the right to. That doesn't mean that government should try to look out for the health of it's citizens. Sorry paul, this isn't an example of bad government.

Edit to add: Could this have anything to do with the fact that San Francisco Giants completely destroyed the inept Rangers?

Of course it's bad government. It's not "looking out for" the people, it's the "you're too stupid to know what's best for your kids" mantra. Happy meals have been around for 40 damn years. I ate them as a kid and millions of others who don't get fat because they get exercise, etc.... and it's not an all the time thing.

[nab 74]

no soul? surely you jest?

you would've HATED me as a parent i used to laugh at my child when asked for a happy meal and respond with "absolutely not but you're perfectly welcome to eat a sad meal at home"

(for those not in the know, the "sad meal" would be the cheaper, healthier, no toy, "you're mean" meal )

Edited November 5, 2010 by nab

[Obama 2012 1,714]

no soul? surely you jest?

you would've HATED me as a parent i used to laugh at my child when asked for a happy meal and respond with "absolutely not but you're perfectly welcome to eat a sad meal at home"

(for those not in the know, the "sad meal" would be the cheaper, healthier, no toy, "you're mean" meal )

as was your choice as a parent. and that is the entire point here.

[Danno 1,228]

It's typical Paul hyperbole. First it's Happy Meals, tomorrow THE WORLD!!!

I think you are a few steps behind in this progression.

YOu can add cigarets, alcohol seat belts, Bike helmets etc. to your suggestion that Happy meals are the "first step" with the nanny state libs long 4.

Edited November 5, 2010 by Danno

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

McDonald's should be outlawed. They are destroying arteries worldwide.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

[웃 910]

I am soul tea about election ! Obama tea'd off

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I've got to agree with Paul here. The government is try to "parent"

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

This is a bunch of BS. McDonalds is an icon...not to mention that the government is over stepping it's bounds by a long way. Frisco has always been screwed up though. First it was Harvey Milk, and now this BS.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think you are a few steps behind in this progression.

YOu can add cigarets, alcohol seat belts, Bike helmets etc. to your suggestion that Happy meals are the "first step" with the nanny state libs long 4.

It's a really lame thing to be outraged about.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

the only nethod of regulation of fast-food (edit: I am no fan of Mickey-D's, but I do use this form of "regulation") should be by the customer (in this case, the child's parents--who can say "no, let us go to BK or Arby's instead", or even the simpler "no")! Edited November 5, 2010 by Saddle Bronc

[Danno 1,228]

It's a really lame thing to be outraged about.

What, that you try to misrepresent the momentum of the Nanny State?