Related posts

CRIME & COURTS

Nancy Mace Pushes Feds To Take Over Federico Murder Case

FITSNews
Crossroads 2026

In Studio: Attorney General Candidate David Pascoe

Will Folks
SC Politics

Rom Reddy: Politician-Led DOGE Commissions A ‘Ruse’

Will Folks

14 comments

Smirks March 12, 2013 at 8:30 am

I don’t know which is worse, the fact that government is trying to stop people from getting a large sugary drink, or that the government is pissing away resources to determine whether it can do so or not in court. Way to go Bloomberg you massive dick, you’ve given us the double whammy of dumb government thumb-twiddling with your nanny-state bullshit. What’s next on the list? Banning refills on anything except water? Limitations on how many Little Debbie snacks you can buy in a day? Requiring a special license to sell candy bars?

You can’t force people to be healthy, and all this shit does is ruin it for the rest of society.

Reply
Smirks March 12, 2013 at 8:30 am

I don’t know which is worse, the fact that government is trying to stop people from getting a large sugary drink, or that the government is pissing away resources to determine whether it can do so or not in court. Way to go Bloomberg you massive dick, you’ve given us the double whammy of dumb government thumb-twiddling with your nanny-state bullshit. What’s next on the list? Banning refills on anything except water? Limitations on how many Little Debbie snacks you can buy in a day? Requiring a special license to sell candy bars?

You can’t force people to be healthy, and all this shit does is ruin it for the rest of society.

Reply
Chris Nölff March 12, 2013 at 8:45 am

When the lawmakers started putting tight restrictions on where you can and cannot smoke cigarettes, I knew it was a matter of time before they started telling you what you can and cannot eat or drink.

Reply
LD March 12, 2013 at 10:29 am

No offense– but some people need to be told what to eat or drink. There are a lot of dumbasses out there that find nutrition with a Pepsi and pork skins.

Reply
vicupstate March 12, 2013 at 12:28 pm

If it affects other members of the public, like smoking, the public has everyright to be involved.

Reply
Nölff March 12, 2013 at 8:45 am

When the lawmakers started putting tight restrictions on where you can and cannot smoke cigarettes, I knew it was a matter of time before they started telling you what you can and cannot eat or drink.

Reply
LD March 12, 2013 at 10:29 am

No offense– but some people need to be told what to eat or drink. There are a lot of dumbasses out there that find nutrition with a Pepsi and pork skins.

Reply
vicupstate March 12, 2013 at 12:28 pm

If it affects other members of the public, like smoking, the public has everyright to be involved.

Reply
jimlewisowb March 12, 2013 at 9:01 am

I hope the South Carolina Legislature will pass a law banning peeing between the hours of 11PM and 7AM

I am tired of getting up every morning around 3AM

Reply
Wee Willie Winkie March 12, 2013 at 11:17 am

Try “DEPENDS” — an excellent product that never fails you.

Reply
jimlewisowb March 12, 2013 at 9:01 am

I hope the South Carolina Legislature will pass a law banning peeing between the hours of 11PM and 7AM

I am tired of getting up every morning around 3AM

Reply
Wee Willie Winkie March 12, 2013 at 11:17 am

Try “DEPENDS” — an excellent product that never fails you.

Reply
La Gloria Cubana March 13, 2013 at 6:36 am

At first, Bloomberg’s action on this pissed me off – and basically, the thought of the government limiting large sugary drinks still does. However, after stepping back and viewing this policy through the prism of home rule and local government, I’ve come to a different conclusion. I mean, why should I care what those idiots in NYC choose to do regarding large sugary drinks (as long as it doesn’t violate the constitution)? After all, if they’re truly aggravated with Bloomberg over this action, then they’ll vote him out and repeal his initiative.

Reply
La Gloria Cubana March 13, 2013 at 6:36 am

At first, Bloomberg’s action on this pissed me off – and basically, the thought of the government limiting large sugary drinks still does. However, after stepping back and viewing this policy through the prism of home rule and local government, I’ve come to a different conclusion. I mean, why should I care what those idiots in NYC choose to do regarding large sugary drinks (as long as it doesn’t violate the constitution)? After all, if they’re truly aggravated with Bloomberg over this action, then they’ll vote him out and repeal his initiative.

Reply

Leave a Comment