San Francisco Enacts a Soda Ban

Politics 53 replies 1,725 views
Little Danny's avatar
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's avatar
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's avatar
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's avatar
Little Danny
Posts: 4,288
Jul 7, 2010 7:13pm
Did somebody hack into I wear Pants account?
justincredible's avatar
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's avatar
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's avatar
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's avatar
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's avatar
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's avatar
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's avatar
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's avatar
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's avatar
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's avatar
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's avatar
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.