Speaking Truth to Power... about drink sizes?

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

And here's Sarah Palin at CPAC, demonstrating the childish reactionism that we've come to expect.

Bonus facts:
1) The NYC drink ban didn't include Big Gulps
2) It was struck down by a judge anyway
3) The lovely people of facebook have christened Sarah Palin as "Bible Spice"

Comments

[cinnamontoast.livejournal.com]

And if they take away a woman's right to privacy in medical decisions at the federal level? I think that's far more of a direct threat than what local politicians are doing within the confines of the five boroughs of NYC. I don't think that they can see the forest through the trees. That's the joke.

As I said, I don't like either. But Bloomberg and the matriarchs dictating onerous personal bans on a local level was solvable for me. The soda thing isn't the first ban - This all started with Giuliani's 'quality of life' thing in the '90s. (Another Republican swimming with Democrats.)

And what I'm saying about Palin is absolutely true. She did not know that Roe v Wade was about privacy. When asked during an interview, she advocated overturning Roe v Wade with one breath, and with the next stated that she absolutely believed in the right to privacy, with none of her misfiring synapses making a connection between the two. It was absolutely stunning.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

And if they take away a woman's right to privacy in medical decisions at the federal level? I think that's far more of a direct threat than what local politicians are doing within the confines of the five boroughs of NYC. I don't think that they can see the forest through the trees. That's the joke.

Maybe, if the abortion debate wasn't more complicated than a simple issue of privacy.

And what I'm saying about Palin is absolutely true. She did not know that Roe v Wade was about privacy. When asked during an interview, she advocated overturning Roe v Wade with one breath, and with the next stated that she absolutely believed in the right to privacy, with none of her misfiring synapses making a connection between the two. It was absolutely stunning.

Yeah, not buying that. It was ruled within the right to privacy, but that doesn't mean the ruling makes a lot of sense in that context. It's not an especially strong ruling, and the argument I'm sure they'd make is that the so-called "right to privacy" wouldn't apply to murder either. Thus the complexity of the situation that's not being recognized.

[cinnamontoast.livejournal.com]

Okay, now you are being deliberately obtuse.

[weswilson]

Betcha never saw THAT comin' didya?

[cinnamontoast.livejournal.com]

Not for miles and miles.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

How so?

[dwer.livejournal.com]

welcome to the world of Jeff.