Archive San Francisco Enacts a Soda Ban

Little Danny

Posts: 4,288

Jul 7, 2010 5:56pm

Ok, this big brother mentality is getting ridiculous. Mayor Gavin Newsome has now banned pop from vending machine in SF. I understand we have some fat people in this country, but outlawing pop? Let's see in San Francsco a man can marry another man, but he can't sit in a public place, light up a Marlboro and go over to the vending machine and buy a Pepsi. Unbelievable.

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A2KLUmGs9jRMqX4BRdnQtDMD;_ylu=X3oDMTEzM3Rka2NoBHBvcwMxBHNlYwNzcgRjb2xvA3NwMgR2dGlkA1VTQzAwNl8x/SIG=127svgbbu/EXP=1278625836/**http%3a//www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/38713/

believer

Posts: 8,153

Jul 7, 2010 7:01pm

Hometown of Nancy Pelosi. Are we surprised by any of this?

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Jul 7, 2010 7:06pm

This is stupid. Also, if we're going to have stupid women in politics can't they at least look like Palin? Pelosi is a troll.

believer

Posts: 8,153

Jul 7, 2010 7:10pm

I Wear Pants;414821 wrote:This is stupid. Also, if we're going to have stupid women in politics can't they at least look like Palin? Pelosi is a troll.

LOL I'll be fair and say I agree.

Little Danny

Posts: 4,288

Jul 7, 2010 7:13pm

Did somebody hack into I wear Pants account?

justincredible

Posts: 32,056

Jul 7, 2010 7:37pm

This is great! Hopefully they spread the ban to private property vending machines. After that they can ban soda from fast food restaurants, grocery and convenience stores. Hopefully this spreads like wildfire to the East coast!

Thread Bomber

Posts: 1,851

Jul 7, 2010 7:40pm

I Wear Pants;414821 wrote:This is stupid. Also, if we're going to have stupid women in politics can't they at least look like Palin? Pelosi is a troll.

THIS

Women are far more credible if they appear to be fuckable.

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Jul 7, 2010 7:42pm

Little Danny;414828 wrote:Did somebody hack into I wear Pants account?

Just because I don't think that a lot of the things that are made to be a huge deal (negatively) on this board are such doesn't mean that I think they are good policies or anything. I just hate people treating things that will likely end up not being anything of substance as huge things.

Also, I've stated disappointments in the current administration several times in the past few weeks alone. And I like me an occasional Mountain Dew. Obama or anyone else can fuck off if they're going to mess with that.

Thread Bomber makes a very valid observation.

believer

Posts: 8,153

Jul 7, 2010 7:49pm

But - HEY - You CAN have pot brownies in SF as long as they're baked according to government regulation: http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/health/San-Franciscos-Rules-for-Making-Pot-Brownies-jw-97897874.html

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Jul 7, 2010 7:50pm

Who the hell wants pot brownies without Mountain Dew?

tk421

Posts: 8,500

Jul 7, 2010 8:00pm

Just another reason to never step foot on California soil. Fucking crazies.

M

Manhattan Buckeye

Posts: 7,566

Jul 7, 2010 8:07pm

this isn't that big of a deal. The ban is only in effect on city property. There might be a few vending machines at tourist spots, but for the most part the people subject to the ban are city employees - if they have a problem with it they should use their vote as a voice.

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Jul 7, 2010 8:23pm

Actually, I agree with Buckeye. I still think it's stupid but it's like getting riled up that they took away the soda machines at schools (kids should have choice right?). If it were a city wide ban then we'd have problems.

tk421

Posts: 8,500

Jul 7, 2010 8:53pm

That's coming next. Got to work into it. Get them used to banning it on government property, then go after city wide. It's coming.

majorspark

Posts: 5,122

Jul 7, 2010 9:13pm

Personally if the people of San Fransisco want to be stupid and limit each others freedoms to enjoy a simple innocent soda. Let them. The good news is those of us here in Ohio can enjoy a cold soda anywhere and anytime we want. If someone wants to take my soda they will have to pry it from my cold dead fingers.

A lesson to take from this. Suppose some day we institute universal national healthcare. One day idiot do gooders like this will infiltrate the federal bureaucracy. In the name of the common good and ever rising healthcare costs they will institute similar ridiculous controls on all US citizens.

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Jul 7, 2010 10:05pm

majorspark;414997 wrote:Personally if the people of San Fransisco want to be stupid and limit each others freedoms to enjoy a simple innocent soda. Let them. The good news is those of us here in Ohio can enjoy a cold soda anywhere and anytime we want. If someone wants to take my soda they will have to pry it from my cold dead fingers.

A lesson to take from this. Suppose some day we institute universal national healthcare. One day idiot do gooders like this will infiltrate the federal bureaucracy. In the name of the common good and ever rising healthcare costs they will institute similar ridiculous controls on all US citizens.

If they did it on state/federal property only I'd think it was stupid but have no massive objection to it. They ever think of it on private property and then I'd have a problem.

CenterBHSFan

Posts: 6,115

Jul 7, 2010 10:15pm

I Wear Pants;415078 wrote:If they did it on state/federal property only I'd think it was stupid but have no massive objection to it. They ever think of it on private property and then I'd have a problem.

But you see the problem is, Pants, they've got their foot in the door. Precedent is set.

That's all it takes.

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Jul 7, 2010 10:20pm

I don't think there is a conspiracy to eliminate soda from the United States. I'm sorry, it's just not something I can see happening.

derek bomar

Posts: 3,722

Jul 7, 2010 10:31pm

Considering my line of work, all I can say is I am disgusted by this

CenterBHSFan

Posts: 6,115

Jul 7, 2010 10:32pm

I don't think it's conspiracy, and that's not what I was meaning. BUT... do not doubt for a second that sometime down the road this won't expand. There will always be somebody to carry the torch further.

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Jul 7, 2010 10:41pm

Do you also get upset about smoking bans on city property? (not talking about statewide business bans but just the city property ones. Also not trying to grill you or make you hypocritical just curious)

CenterBHSFan

Posts: 6,115

Jul 7, 2010 10:52pm

No Pants, I don't. And I'm an ex-smoker. As far as city buildings and whatnot.

But take Ohio, for instance. How long did the smoking ban take to go from public to private property?

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Jul 7, 2010 10:55pm

Valid point.

My question for some of the people on the board (don't think it was you specifically) is why is the attitude "well it's easy enough to get it on the ballot/it was voted on so why are you whining?" when it comes to something like gay marriage/civil unions and yet there is an outrage at something like the smoking ban that was also voted on?

HitsRus

Posts: 9,206

Jul 7, 2010 11:46pm

It really is pretty simple...just oppose bans PERIOD....just on general principles.

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Jul 8, 2010 12:33am

As a general rule that's actually pretty good.