King-Sized No More

Michelle Obama shrinks your snickers

Credit: Roger Wong/INFphoto.com/NewscomCredit: Roger Wong/INFphoto.com/Newscom

In 1998 a Colorado handyman got swept up in an avalanche that buried his snowmobile and left him stranded in a blizzard. For five days and four nights, rescue teams struggled to locate him. Luckily, the Snickers bar he had in his pocket was a king-sized version. Every one of its 510 calories helped him survive his ordeal. 

Future avalanche victims had better hope for a faster rescue team. Mars Inc., the manufacturer of Snickers, is phasing out chocolate products that exceed 250 calories per portion as part of an agreement with Partnership for a Healthier America (PHA). Founded in 2010 in conjunction with the Let’s Move! program, First Lady Michelle Obama’s government initiative aimed at shaping up the nation’s youth, PHA has a mandate to “monitor and publicly report on the progress” of partners such as Mars and, more generally, to “make the healthy choice the easy choice.” 

Call it “yes, we can’t!” progressivism. Under the mantle of “choice,” Mars and the PHA are eliminating consumer options. While this tactic may help avid Snickers eaters shed a few pounds and improve corporate profits (don’t expect Mars to reduce its prices when it cuts its standard 280-calorie bar to 250 calories), the Orwellian doublespeak is sure to leave a bad taste in one’s mouth. 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • James Anderson Merritt||

    Without the freedom to make unapproved choices, you have no freedom of choice at all. First they came for my 100w incandescent bulbs, but I said nothing because I was already using LEDs. Then they came for my King Size Snickers bars, but I said nothing, because I preferred Milky Ways. ... (to be continued...)

  • Tulpa the White||

    And then they came for the Arctic Shatter Powerade, and I said nothing... oh wait, that flavor was voluntarily discontinued by the manufacturer, so you can't really say "they came for" it. Just like King Size Snickers.

  • Marshall Gill||

    Voluntarily? Because nothing says voluntary like the wife of the Head regulator making "suggestions"?

    Nice little candy company you got there, be a shame if anything were to happen to it.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Considering the wife of the Head Regulator lived in Chicago... yep, good analogy.

  • Ted S.||

    They're regulating head now?

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Never put anything past liberal regulators.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Curious, what regulators can credibly pose a threat to Mars?

  • Mr. FIFY||

    We're talking about politicians and the wife of the current most-powerful politician, Tulpa.

  • ||

    Curious, what regulators can credibly pose a threat to Mars?

    The FDA, and to a lesser extent, HHS.

  • Tulpa the White||

    You forgot NASA.

  • ||

    You forgot NASA.

    You more obtusely contrarian you feign, Tulpa, the more I am convinced you are really your erstwhile nemesis, Neu Mejican.

  • ||

    "You" == "The"

  • ||

    "You" == "The"

  • ||

    "You" == "The"

  • Tulpa the White||

    That was actually supposed to be a joke. Mars, get it?

  • ||

    That was actually supposed to be a joke. Mars, get it?

    DERP. Now, I do. Ok, that was a very good funny. Perhaps Bok will actually use that one in his cartoon. Unlikely, since it's actually...funny.

  • Emperor Wears No Clothes||

    I suggest a name change to Tulpa the Obtuse.

  • Tulpa the White||

    No, YOUR tangent is negative!

  • ||

    "Curious, what regulators can credibly pose a threat to Mars?"

    Any future ones that get the right autorization from Congress. Hell, Congress could set up a regulatory agency next year that's modeled on the SEC but whose purview is academic research. Licensed peer reviewers, 10K-esque raw data filings, etc.

    Granted that the risk is small, but big companies have been counselled again and again by their legal teams that even frivolous legal demands be settled if the settlement can be done cheaply. They treat demands from government officials in the same vein, even if said demands are long shots. In this case, I'm sure that the worthies of Mars Inc. have already costed it out and decided that withdrawing the king-sized Snickers bar is cheap "friendship" - i.e., compliance.

  • Malto Dextrin||

    Congress? Congress? Hwee don' need no steenkin' Congress.

    We'll just get a UN mandate.

  • MccallJulio5||

    what Maria said I'm dazzled that a mom able to make $8901 in a few weeks on the computer. did you read this site..FaceBookJob.Notlong.CoM

  • Tulpa the White||

    There is zero regulatory apparatus for punishing candy manufacturers, and creating one would require an act of Congress.

    It's not like banks, insurance companies, or toy manufacturers.

  • ||

    There is zero regulatory apparatus for punishing candy manufacturers, and creating one would require an act of Congress.

    You are familiar with ObamneyCare, no?

  • Marshall Gill||

    There is zero regulatory apparatus for punishing candy manufacturers

    ??? You are unfamiliar with the EPA, LRB, FDA, OSHA, IRS ect? Maybe there isn't anything specific to candy makers, yet. Until the government has Congress create a "Regulatory Authority of Candy Sizes" they are powerless to coerce Mars?!

  • Pound. Head. On. Desk.||

    There is zero regulatory apparatus for punishing candy manufacturers

    ??? You are unfamiliar with

    There is no real need to have a regulatory apparatus. A judge once told me I would volunteer to pay a voluntary donation to a local hospital's Drunk Driving Fund, whatever that is. Never mind the traffic violation had nothing to do with actual drinking or driving.

  • fried wylie||

    Never mind the traffic violation had nothing to do with actual drinking or driving.

    Someone within 5miles of the violation was drunk.

    Case Closed.

  • Emperor Wears No Clothes||

    That's good enough for the MADD Nazis.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    It's not like banks, insurance companies, or toy manufacturers.

    Or Guitar Manufacturers,

    oh never mind.

  • BoscoH||

    You're actually pretty wrong about it. USDA, through the school lunch programs, is initiating a lot of influence over what can be sold on school grounds at lunch time. Turns out that Snickers bars are actually allowed. Here's a link to start with.

  • Jerryskids||

    The worst thing about the banned lightbulbs is the number of people who will insist with a straight face that you can still get a 100 watt incandescent bulb - just buy the equivalent CFL or the 90 watt halogen.

  • fried wylie||

    will insist with a straight face

    There's your mistake. That's not a face intentionally being kept from laughing under great pressure, it's just a blank, unthinking, dead, zombie face.

  • James Anderson Merritt||

    Oh, and by the way: FIRST! (Finally!)

  • Zuul mothafucka Zuul||

    How long until only the misnamed fun size bars are allowed?

  • wareagle||

    when Michelle and her ilk are able to outlaw the concept of fun, at least fun that is not state approved.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    There's a disturbing similarity to the Gary Stix link in the "Matt Welch Talks SuperPAC..." thread. The No-Funsters are gaining ground, as evidenced by Missus Obama's iron-fist-in-iron-glove tone here.

  • wareagle||

    pretty much encapsulates what liberalism is all about - if people are free to do it and enjoy it, they must be stopped. Equality of misery first.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Excluding gay issues and abortion, of course. Everything else must be regulated, though.

  • Harvard||

    Surely you see the irony here. A super-sized chocolate candy bar authoratatively downsized by a super-sized chocolate candy bar.

    It's so Sammy Davis Jr.

  • CockGobbla||

    If your goal is to make America "healthier", why stop at Fun Size?

    Of course, Mars, inc. could get back some donations to the Democrats, and maybe we can get back the King Size...Please.

  • LarryA||

    Maybe if we called them "Obama Sized." But then I'd have to get over my hurl reflex.

  • ||

    I don't think anyone would ever be able to say that without urking, actually.

  • Robert||

    Well, what the heck...that's how we got Baby Ruth.

  • Tulpa the White||

    This isn't a case of "allowing", it's a case of Mars voluntarily discontinuing this product.

    If you have evidence of a threat of coercive regulation against large candy bars, provide it.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    IMO, it's the threat of government intervention in this case.

    It pays to be skeptical.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Just like the MPAA voluntarily rates its movies, just like comic book publishers voluntarily instituted the Comics Code, just like golf courses switched from "no darkies" to "members only."

    All utterly spontaneous changes that would have happened with or without the implied threat of government action.

  • Robert||

    MPAA ratings have continued long after any implied threat of gov't action ceased.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Because if they were discontinued, gov't action would reappear... with a vengeance.

  • fried wylie||

    "THE MPAA HAS STOPPED CARING ABOUT OUR CHILDREN!!!1111 STRING EM UP!"

  • Tulpa the White||

    SCOTUS would eat them for lunch if they tried. It's not 1968.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Again... why so trusting?

  • Cdr Lytton||

    SCOTUS would eat them for lunch?

    It wouldn't even get that far. Look at video games ratings for an industry that didn't exist in 1968. "Voluntary" ratings due to threat of legislative action and even then lawmakers continue to push more at both the state and federal levels.

    "Voluntary"? Why is the FTC spending taxpayer money to "collect data" on whether retailers are enforcing age restrictions on video games?

  • Cdr Lytton||

    Threat of government action has ceased?? Are you f***ing kidding me?

    The second MPAA even thought about doing away with ratings legislation would be introduced, congresscritters would pummel them in the press, and some administrative agency would institute "emergency" regulations.

  • wareagle||

    let's see: Mars is taking a product off the shelf in conjunction with an "initiative" near to Michelle's heart. I'm sure it is a coincidence. Companies stop selling things that people want all the time.

    There is not even the hint that this product is going away because no one is buying it.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Spot-on, eagle. This is just a Kinder, Gentler Food Police initiative.

    The necessary roughness starts when Michelle sends in the SWAT teams to deal with the Candy Outliers.

  • fried wylie||

    Gibson'd baby!

    "Where'd you source these almonds from? And the cacao? We're going to have to confiscate all your material and paperwork to verify that everything is in accordance with regulation."

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Wouldn't put it past 'em, wylie. Good analogy.

  • Jerryskids||

    If you have evidence of a threat of coercive regulation against large candy bars, provide it.

    Here you go.

    Kind of like Social Security 'contributions'. Or mandatory 'volunteer work'. Or 'voluntary compliance' with the IRS.

    Have you not been paying attention to all the food Nazi links, the Bloomberg links, the CSPI links? Here's the master plan.

    I am annoyed by people who insist that all government isn't at gunpoint because you choose to comply before the guns come out.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Except this isn't government.

  • ||

    Apparatchik. This term applies, Tulpa.

  • ||

    I've learned something new! Thanks!

  • ||

    The CDC isn't government? I guess I learned something new as well.

  • Pound. Head. On. Desk.||

    This isn't a case of "allowing", it's a case of Mars voluntarily discontinuing this product.

    If you have evidence of a threat of coercive regulation against large candy bars, provide it.

    Everything government does is ultimately at the point of a gun. If you don't "cooperate," eventually it comes down to getting a gun pointed at you.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Government isn't doing this, Mars is.

  • ||

    "Nice little confectionery company you have there; 'twould be a shame if something happened to it."

  • Solanum||

    No, fun size bars are next. Evil corporations use advertising to brainwash teh childrens into eating the fun size bars, you know.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I think you're on to something.

    Imitation fun is almost as dangerous as the real thing.

  • ||

    Depends on the brand of fun, Tulpy Poo. You're going to be shit out o' luck when they get around to your treasured Reese's made peanut butter goodies and your Faygo purple drank.

    Is imitation Klown (K)rap as dangerous as Da REELZ thang?

  • ||

    100% Fun. I highly recommend this album and artiste.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    Word. More good power pop. Groovus, you may have good taste in music after all.

  • ||

    I got a Twix commercial before the song started.

  • WWNGD?||

    What if they added "(sarcastic)" under the words "fun size"

  • fried wylie||

    That wont piss off the Powers That Be, no, not at all.

    Jeez, why don't you just ask Mars to paint laser targets on their HQ and mfg facilities.

  • Penis Carrot||

    Or 'j/k'?

  • IceTrey||

    Because it's physically impossible for a human to carry more than one candy bar.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Under the mantle of “choice,” Mars and the PHA are eliminating consumer options.

    If there's a market for king-sized candy bars, another manufacturer will fill it. Adam Smith 101.

    Back when Reason was a libertarian magazine instead of a 24/7 "pox on both their houses" whining outlet for cool kids, they would have realized this.

  • tarran||

    You're right perfessor, because it's so easy to get the FDA to approve a new manufacturing facility, industrial candy manufacture in the U.S. is not an oligopoly that has to kowtow to the perfumed princes of DC to be permitted to keep their market share.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Man, it's a whole web of conspiracies, ain't it!

  • wareagle||

    Conspiracies, maybe. Coincidences, not. Please. Mars suddenly decides to no longer offer a product at the same time that it partners with a group pushing govt-mandated choices.

  • Robert||

    Food mfg. facilities are not even subject to prior FDA approval.

  • ||

    Regulation after the fact, Robert. You have heard of State Depts. of Health, no? Yes, the dreaded MPH (Master's in Pubic Health).

  • Robert||

    Have you ever heard of a health dept. citing a food maker for making food the wrong size? There's simply no support for this in the laws of any state or municipality.

  • ||

    *public". The first one applies too.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Thank you, I wasn't sure about that so I didn't want to say anything.

  • Marshall Gill||

    So since food mfg. facilities are not subject to prior FDA approval they are outside the coercive power of government? They are probably not bound by the TSA, either, but freedom from one or two or three alphabet agencies doesn't mean the government can't use the multitude of others at their disposal.

    Tulpa, you remain the King of the purposefully obtuse.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    What you said, Marshall.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Shouldn't you be fixing, not agreeing? I'm going to talk to the DOJ about interstate fraud if you keep this up.

  • Tulpa the White||

    So any manufacturer that does something that BO agrees with is assumed to be doing it in response to govt pressure, even if it increases their profits.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Never put anything past government, Tulpa. No matter which Team is in power.

  • SIV||

    MM Mars is a privately held company with a majority interest held by members of the same family. They dominate certain sectors of the candy market...quick, name an off brand of colorful button-shaped candy coated milk chocolates.

    The FTC comes to mind...

  • Robert||

    If what you wrote were the way we should think about all business, then there is no evidence of the marketplace's satisfying consumers' desires. Everything that's made is actually made at gov't's behest, indirectly thru threat of legal action otherwise. All economies are command economies to an equal degree, and there are no lessons to be drawn from the effects of differences in gov't policy from one jurisdiction to another, because those differences are only apparent; in jurisdictions where practices are ostensibly allowed or not mandated, the situation is actually the same as in those where they are, because of the implied threat. So there's never been any evidence that freedom works, because there can never be any freedom anywhere, ever.

  • Marshall Gill||

    If what you wrote were the way we should think about all business

    To some extent, yes. When there is so much power to be had outside the free market, you don't assume that ANY business is a result of efficiency or customer choice unless you have actual evidence of the same. I can certainly accept the idea that eliminating the King Size bar is a market driven one, except that no evidence has been presented as such. We are not talking about lemonade stands, which also get coerced by government but about a multi-million dollar corporation that already has the government all the way up it's ass.

    You act as if the government either absolutely coerces or absolutely does not. Considering the expansive power of our government today, in excess of $3,000,000,000,000 per year, the default isn't freedom but coercion.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    You're cranky. Have a Snickers, in your choice* of size.


    *for now.

  • Entropy Void||

    Tulpa, I agree with your last line, but EVERYTHING else you have had to say today has been perfectly Obamatronic.

    Shame.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Everything I've said today and yesterday has been regarding anti-Obama conspiracy theories.

    There's plenty of fodder for denouncing the BO regime without delving into impetuous dot-connecting.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Always be suspicious, Tulpa. And not just suspicious of one half of the two-ideals divide.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Think about this, Tulpa:

    http://www.consumerfreedom.com/issues/food-police/

    Should THIS organization *have* to exist? IMO, it shouldn't be necessary, but there it is - and there's a good reason why; just re-read the mission statements of the CSPI and the PHA, and stop glossing over how people in those organizations are trying to tell us how to live.

  • Tulpa the White||

    If you're always suspicious, you must be suspicious of your suspicion too.

    That's what birthers (and other conspiracy theorists) clearly seem to be lacking.

  • ||

    If you're always suspicious, you must be suspicious of your suspicion too.

    OK, that's it! Now I'm convinced you really are Neu Mejican.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Wow... conflating this, with birtherism?

  • Tulpa the White||

    They're both conspiracy theories with large numbers of adherents in these parts.

    There was like a 10:1 ratio of birthers to nonbirthers in the thread yesterday.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Nah. While both of us are picky about definitions and such, NM always assumed the worst about anyone who opposed him. I always strive to attack the argument until it becomes clear the person is being glib or dishonest.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    "in these parts"

    Well, I've always said "unfortunately, Barry was born on American soil", so you're at least off by one.

  • ||

    glib or dishonest

    I give you shit legitimately, Tulpa. I have never been accused of arguing in bad faith.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    I'm wondering why "dishonest" came into this discussion...

    As for "glib", I detest that word, as it is usually used by liberals.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I've got some accusations ready for you, GM. Just waiting for you to bring up my strangulated Peter Pan hemorrhoids again.

  • ||

    I've got some accusations ready for you, GM. Just waiting for you to bring up my strangulated Peter Pan hemorrhoids again.

    Fire away. If your stools are loose, not in my general direction please.

  • SIV||

    Like your dishonesty in claiming it was 10:1 birthers?

  • Tulpa the White||

    With regard to commenters, not comment count. My prolificness skews the latter ratio towards unity.

  • Emperor Wears No Clothes||

    Let's see if I have Tulpa the Turd figured out:
    Criticize Bushies = skeptical
    Criticize the African = conspiracy

  • Tulpa the White||

    Wait, I'm an Obamabot now? Just a few days ago I was said to be shilling for Romney.

    It's good that I have you guys to remind me which team my consistent positions are shilling for from day to day.

  • fried wylie||

    my consistent positions

    Ie: Statism, which, yeah, is compatible with both parties.

    In addition to the fact that their policies are identical, so shilling for one really is shilling for the other.

  • ||

    Your shilling is totally consistent: They are both Big Government Fellators.

  • Tulpa the White||

    OK, now you are being dishonest. I'm not remotely a big govt supporter.

    Anti-war
    Anti-gun control
    Anti-spending
    Anti-WOD
    Anti-WOT
    Anti-welfare

    I'm looking for a big govt position in my soul, and the closest I can find is being against abortion and not wanting to privatize roads.

  • ||

    I'm not remotely a big govt supporter.

    I believe those are your honest positions, Tulpa; I apologize if I intimated otherwise. However, you have a very long HX of supporting and singing the praises of how Grand Coif Tarkin, Shit Flopney himself, is a better choice than His Pestilency.

    I realize support for Flopney =/= your personal policy preferences, but support for him does not disabuse support for Big Government, which Flopney favors and to which you show a disturbing tendency to default.

    BTW, wanting to see RvW struck down and the issue returned to the states is not a Big Government issue.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    For the record, I never accused you of shilling for Barry and Wife, but I have been curious why you're so kind to them.

  • Entropy Void||

    I cannot speak for others, but MY comment was directed towards your arguement, not your person.

    And I continue to stand by it.

  • ||

    If there's a market for king-sized candy bars, another manufacturer will fill it. Adam Smith 101.

    In the progressive mind, Tulpy, the fix is simply to eliminate the market and subsidize failing markets. Also, Tulpy, Karl Marx Hates Your Guts.

    And, fried chicken.

  • wareagle||

    fried chicken may well be next on the endangered foods list.

  • SIV||

    It's fattening, targeted at low income minorities and inherently racist.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    I know quite a few black people and they love fried chicken. Also, all the asians I know love fried chicken. I fuckin' love fried chicken too. Therefore, fried chicken is not racist.

    I don't know about hispanics though...

  • fried wylie||

    It shall come to pass that frying large sections of the bird will be outlawed. KFC/Popeyes/etc will still be permitted (by permit) to fry (in approved non-transfat oils) battered or breaded, USDA inspected, reconstituted ground chicken in portions not to exceed 1oz.

  • perlhaqr||

    No way man. Those would be nuggets, clearly marketed towards children. You might as well be stuffing cigarettes in their mouths at that point.

  • ||

    Is that Kristin Chenowith pictured? Good SOD that woman is a dimwit! The candy bar is almost as big as she is, and I'd bet my left testicle that the candy bar is smarter, and certainly more nutritious. She's almost as much of an embarrassment to the state of OK as Wants-More-Wampum Warren is (who, ironically, would be pushing for the same policies as head of the Consumer Prophylaxis Bureau).

    She is a talented singer; she couldn't act her way out of box of Cracker Jacks. Is the extra large size of Cracker Jacks next on the hit list? Will the cheap novelty toys contained therein be vilified for appealing to the yoots of America? Is the term "Cracker Jack" racist?

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Only if it was spelled "Cracka Jax", though ragging on white people isn't considered racist these days.

  • SIV||

    Don't go dissing that lovely little well-stacked mature midget. Kristin Chenoweth is adorable.

  • ||

    Seriously. She was awesome in "Pushing Daisies"!

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

    She turns me on.

  • santyant||

    She probably eats several aday herself lol.

    www.Privacy-Matters.tk

  • Broseph of Invention||

    What, vaginas? What are you talking about, anonbot? You WOULD laugh out loud at that.

  • ||

    SAVE ANONBOT!

  • Tulpa the White||

    How in the world did anonbot make it through the registration process?

  • ||

    Anon-Bot is most prolific and prodigious, My Dearest Tulpa. I suspect Agent Smith has imparted some of his "genetic" lines of code here.

  • fried wylie||

    Well, since a human had to create Anonbot, I assume that same human could take 15secs to register and then give Anonbot his username and password.

  • Jerryskids||

    (don’t expect Mars to reduce its prices when it cuts its standard 280-calorie bar to 250 calories)

    Mars gets props from the health Nazis for being 'socially responsible citizens' while downsizing their products in order to boost profits. This has absolutely nothing to do with health. It's inflation. Too bad the ice cream people didn't think to sell their undersized half-gallons as 'healthy-portion sized'. Same with the Oscar Mayer and Keebler 14 ounce pound and the Frito Lay "Now With More Air!" packaging.

  • Jerryskids||

    Not to mention which, so much of the 'ice-cream' isn't even ice-cream any more. Next time you're in the supermarket, take a good look at the half-gallons of ice-cream and see how many are 1.75 (or even less) quarts of frozen dairy product.

  • Tulpa the White||

    while downsizing their products in order to boost profits.

    How dare they maximize their profits in a noncoercive way!

  • Jerryskids||

    They can maximize their profits in any way they see fit - including lying about the fact that they are voluntarily making their products healthier.

    Doesn't mean I can't call bullshit on their lies.

  • The Derider||

    Now you're arguing that government intervention, not market forces, maximize profits.

    What side are you on, man?

  • Mr. FIFY||

    One might ask you that question, Derider.

  • Jerryskids||

    Ask K Street what maximizes profits. Or GM or Goldman Sachs.

  • ||

    He's pointing out that pinko fucks are praising them for promoting healthy attitudes while ignoring their downsizing of their products in order to boost profits, which you would think would be objectionable to pinko fucks. That's the point.

  • Tulpa the White||

    True, perhaps I jumped to conclusions about JK's point.

    But most commenters here are playing up the govt intervention angle, and this excerpt of Beato's original article seems in that vein as well.

    And frankly, businesses "spin" their reasons for making changes customers don't like all the time. Look at the banks that are trying to get you to accept paperless statements and hotels that want to wash your sheets every other day, supposedly in the name of environmentalism.

    But Mrs BO isn't involved in those so it doesn't stir the pot like this does.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    If Missus Obama were a Republican, I'd be just as disgusted with her mere presence on this planet as I do with her being a Democrat.

    Next?

  • ||

    Name a single person here that would purposely abstain from calling banks' or hotels' bullshit about why they're cutting costs. A single person.

  • Tulpa the White||

    But they're not writing articles (twice!) about it or claiming that the EPA is behind it.

  • fried wylie||

    trying to get you to accept paperless statements

    Huh? I can't get them to stop sending paper. Why do you want paper? Are you incapable of producing your own printouts from their website if you really need to waste some paper?

  • Tulpa the White||

    I don't want paper and only want them to wash the sheets when I drunkenly piss in them. That's not the point.

  • fried wylie||

    Keebler 14 ounce pound

    It's a Baker's pound, like a Baker's Dozen.

    Huh, no such thing you say. Well, damn.

  • Broseph of Invention||

    The only King Size bars that were ever worth the money (assuming constant pricing, which they usually were) were Twix, Kit-Kat, and Reese's Cups, because they were actually twice the size, as opposed to 160% or whatever. Of course, Reese's were a waste for the reason of low chocolate:peanut butter ratio, just not for size reasons.

    If anything should be banned it should be "fun size", because there's very little that's fun about a bite-sized candy bar. Needs to be 5x larger. At least Hershey's miniatures describe a property, not a result.

  • ||

    If anything should be banned it should be "fun size"

    ***talking about myself***

    "It's a 'fun size'"

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    While this tactic may help avid Snickers eaters shed a few pounds...

    It's a ludicrous notion that it will.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Founded in 2010 in conjunction with – but independent from – Let's Move!, PHA is a nonpartisan, nonprofit that is led by some of the nation's most respected health and childhood obesity advocates. Supporting our effort is our honorary chair First Lady Michelle Obama, alongside our honorary vice-chairmen The Honorable William H. Frist, MD, and The Honorable Mayor Cory A. Booker of Newark, NJ. Our board of directors also includes nationally recognized business leaders, advocates, health professionals and thought leaders from a variety of backgrounds.

    *puke*

  • Virginian||

    Holy shit that's three awful fucking names.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    And all three are working for an organization that's just as fucking awful as the misnamed "Center for Science in the Public Interest".

    Disgusting.

  • Marshall Gill||

    And all three are working for an organization that's just as fucking awful as the misnamed "Center for Science in the Public Interest".

    Say what you will about Ayn Rand, her prediction of the CSPI with her State Science Institute was spot on.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    And Orwell, in the scene where Winston Smith is admonished for not taking his mandatory morning exercise more seriously.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Booker isn't bad for a Dem big-city mayor.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    He's involved with Frist and Missus Obama in this PHA nonsense; therefore, Booker is not to be trusted.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Booker isn't bad for a Dem big-city mayor.

    Eric Honecker wasn't bad for a communist dictator, either.

  • sloopyinca||

    Our board of directors also includes nationally recognized business leaders, advocates, health professionals and thought leaders from a variety of backgrounds.

    What the fuck is a "thought leader"?

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Top. Men., sloop.

  • GILMORE||

    What the fuck is a "thought leader"?

    Puppets that agree with your stupid fucking idea.

  • Brett L||

    Someone who has power or access to power but has never done a damned thing in the field they've been recruited into.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Paul Krugman?

  • Jerryskids||

    Just google "nationally recognized thought leaders" with the quotation marks. Virtually all of the top results are health-field related. Apparently our thought leaders are scientifically appointed. Are you arguing with Science?

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Ewwww. I can't un-see what happened when I Googled that phrase.

    I need a drink.

  • fried wylie||

    Are you arguing with Science?

    Certainly not. Just with what passes for science these days.

  • wareagle||

    every time I see an organization brand itself as nonpartisan, I start looking at the party labels of those involved. Michelle we know about, Frist is a an ex-Repub Congressman, Booker a Dem.

    So, it would appear that "nonpartisan" is a benign way of saying bipartisan statism. Seriously, who believes that nonpartisan also means nonpolitical.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    My reaction to "nonpartisan" is "they're full of shit". Always has been.

  • Tulpa the White||

    About Reason

    Reason Foundation's nonpartisan public policy research promotes choice, competition, and a dynamic market economy as the foundation for human dignity and progress.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    So? There's exceptions to every rule. I'd trust Reason a fuck of a lot more than some CSPI-style bullshit affiliated with anything called "Let's Move".

  • wareagle||

    and in Reason's case, 'nonpartisan' means not Red or Blue. No one is calling it nonpolitical.

  • Killazontherun||

    If Tulpa was capable of making that subtle distinction from your post above, would he have bothered to make the irrelevant point he did about the Reason Foundation? Likely not. It's a running theme there that can only be explained by a lack of cognizant awareness. Just smile and wave and ask him if he is having a good time, while slowly backing off. Episiarch will be back soon to resume babysitting duties.

  • ||

    Can't someone else babysit Professor Pomeranian for a while? Why do I have to do it? It's not like I had unprotected sex that led to him...oh wait.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Just because you're old enough to be my father doesn't mean you are.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Nice to see that the Axis of Glib is growing.

    It is funny picturing Epi as a babysitter. It might actually work, as the baby would probably get so bored and exhausted with his shenanigans that it would fall right to sleep.

  • Tulpa the White||

    1. I was responding to Senor FIFY's claim that nonpartisan == full of shit.

    2. The statement from PHA doesn't claim that it's nonpolitical, so I have no idea why you're bringing that up. The two "non"s they use are nonpartisan and nonprofit.

  • ||

    No, you're being contrarian because you think it makes you look intelligent. Guess what? It doesn't. But hey, continue to do it, it's not like it isn't amusing to watch someone so insecure about their intelligence flail about.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Okay, okay, I should have said "usually full of shit". No cookie for me.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Banjos/sloopy, you seriously ought to consider hiring him. Translating the vacuous ad hominems into baby talk may be difficult, but it's faster acting than Theraflu.

  • ||

    Wait, you want me to respond to your vacuous, retarded contrarian statements like they're valid and not completely retarded?

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA

    (takes breath)

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  • ||

    but it's faster acting than Theraflu.

    Theraflu is little better than a placebo at this point in anti-viral therapy, Tulpa.

    Pharma FAIL!

  • Tulpa the White||

    My immune system's willpower must be quite strong, since Theraflu works every time for me.

  • ||

    My immune system's willpower must be quite strong, since Theraflu works every time for me.

    A fool and his money are consistently parted. I believe there is an Iron Law for this?

  • Tulpa the White||

    So you're saying if I just eat some Reese's Pieces and will the flu gone, it will go away just as fast as if I take Theraflu?

  • ||

    So you're saying if I just eat some Reese's Pieces and will the flu gone, it will go away just as fast as if I take Theraflu?

    In terms of actually treating the flu virus v. treating the symptoms of the flu, yes.

    FACT PWND.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I only care about treating the flu insofar as it makes the symptoms go away.

    I don't care if my blood looks like pond water under a microscope so long as I don't have symptoms.

  • ||

    Good! Then next time make sure your glib claims about the efficacy of your meds are a bit more accurate, and don't forget when you are getting trashed on Theraflu and Dimetapp that you are still contagious with the flu or cold or whatever little buggy you are incubating.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Wait, I'm supposed to care about other people? That's where I must have gotten confused.

  • ||

    That's where I must have gotten confused.

    Too much Dimetapp. I suspect this is a much larger problem and explains your faux obtuse contrarianism.

  • ||

    Wait, I'm supposed to care about other people?

    I recall you having a niece and a statist minded sister.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I'm not around them enough to share my archaean and viral groupies.

  • Emperor Wears No Clothes||

    "thought leaders"

  • ||

    What the fuck is a "thought leader"?

    TOP. MEN. Duh!

    Dr. Bill Frist still wants ObamneyCare, BTW. He has yet to disavow this view. In fact, during the HillaryCare debates as the erstwhile Senate Majority Leader is reputed to have said, "Just socialize it already," on the senate floor.

  • ||

    More from Lawrence Vance.

    (Stupid two link limit. Will Michelle be doing this with sausage as well?)

  • Mr. FIFY||

    "doing this with sausage"

    Now, *there's* a specialized kink.

  • GILMORE||

    Now they can sell 2 smaller ones to the fatties for more profit. TEH EVILS PROFIT! But then... I'm sure the inevitable, "tax corporations for makin teh fatties" is around the corner, so that won't last long.

  • Tulpa the White||

    If only there were some sort of economic mechanism that could punish producers for refusing to produce products their customers wanted to buy.

  • ||

    Irrelevant. Do you honestly not understand the point people here are making -- what we're actually objecting to?

  • Tulpa the White||

    You seem to be objecting to a supposed government intervention which probably doesn't exist, and/or a "reduction of choice" that is likely to be remedied by noncoercive market mechanisms if that choice remains a popular one.

    So, two things that are strange to be objecting to.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Why are you so trusting, Tulpa? Especially when it comes to government?

    Or have you always been like this, and I just didn't notice it until earlier today?

  • Tulpa the White||

    A true skeptic is skeptical of his own skepticism as much as anything else. Particularly when that skepticism lines up with the desires of his heart.

    I would love to have another rhetorical stick to beat up on the BO administration with. Which is why I must be skeptical of that.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Like I said above, I'd be just as skeptical of Missus Obama if she were a Republican.

    People who meddle For The Public Good are almost universally un-trustable.

  • Tulpa the White||

    You should be skeptical of Mrs BO. But that doesn't mean she's behind this in a coercive way.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    I refuse to believe she isn't connected somehow.

    Plus, she's a liberal, and they're all about coercion.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Rational people don't believe in bogeymen.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Rational people also don't dismiss potential threats to liberty.

  • ||

    "You seem to be objecting to a supposed government intervention which probably doesn't exist."

    There shouldn't even be the possibility that it could exist, yet we have not only the possibility that it is taking place in the given case, but a probability that it is. That's an abomination in and of itself.

    "and/or a "reduction of choice" that is likely to be remedied by noncoercive market mechanisms if that choice remains a popular one."

    Absolutely irrelevant. Markets shouldn't have to "adjust" to government skull-fuckery. Again, that's the point.

  • Tulpa the White||

    You're ASSUMING the existence of govt intervention in this case with no evidence and significant reasons to doubt it (ie, that this helps Mars' profits).

    That's the problem.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Why not assume such, Tulpa? You pay attention to things... surely, you know how many tentacles government has, and how deep and wide they are spread?

  • Tulpa the White||

    Why not assume such, Tulpa?

    Because Mars probably profits from this move.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    And that's the only motivation on Mars' part?

    Wow. I wish I could be so... trusting.

  • ||

    You're kidding me, right?

  • fried wylie||

    You're kidding me, right?

    Sorry, the response we were looking for was "Are you serious?!?!"

  • Tulpa the White||

    The reach of Michelle Obama transcends time and space, apparently. From the previous version of this article:

    In England, the standard Snickers bar was slightly larger than its American counterpart until just a few years ago. In 2008, however, Mars U.K. reduced its size from 62.5 grams to 58 grams (or 2.2 ounces to 2.04 ounces). It didn’t publicize this change, but according to the Daily Mail, when observers started noting that Mars U.K. was still charging the old price for the newly shrunken bar, the company explained that it had downsized its products to “help tackle the nation’s obesity crisis.”
  • Mr. FIFY||

    And, knowing how coercive UK governance is compared even to our own might in the realm of government coddling... you don't think such governance had ANYTHING to do with the downsizing Over There?

    We're talking about left-wing control freaks, Tulpa. Surely, you concede they exist right alongside their Team Red counterparts?

  • Tulpa the White||

    Leftist authoritarians definitely exist (and BO, his family, his ilk, and his fans are among them).

    This is unlikely to be their handiwork, though. Mars is trying to maximize profits and "spin" to try to keep its customers from getting pissed.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Okay, let's replace "skeptical" with "suspicious".

    Better?

  • Tulpa the White||

    Where? Neither word occurs in any of the comments in this subthread.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Um, you chastised me not many minutes ago over being skeptical and suspicious, so both of those words ARE in "any of the comments".

  • Tulpa the White||

    Actually I encouraged you to be more skeptical.

    True skepticism does not exempt itself from skepticism.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Why should I be self-skeptical?

  • Robert||

    No, I don't think UK governance had anything to do with an unpublicized change of 4.5 g out of 62.5. If that's not clearly a way to slip a small price increase past the customer, I don't know what evidence you'd need.

  • Robert||

    I'm not buying the idea that this is in any part a rxn to gov't action. If Congress were to enact legislation tomorrow to limit (or enable regul'ns limiting) the size of candies sold, candy companies would wait until the very day it went into effect to stop selling them. There's no long lead time needed in gearing up for a change in size of candies made, so nothing to be gained by stopping their prod'n one day earlier than the law would require. Customers of Mars are simply not impressed by any p.r. that could be gained by acting in concert with stated gov't or allied preferences, either. People don't give this stuff a thought when they buy candy. Clearly this is an excuse for what Mars was going to do anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some inside info leading to the anmt.

  • ||

    Tulpy poo, will you be responding to Robert's theory with "ZOMG! CONSPEERAHSEE!"

    I would hate for you to be inconsistent.

    FTR, Robert's theory is not without merit, since it is arguable the mercantilism also looms large. I don't entirely buy the notion of using fedgov as a scapegoat here, however.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    But dismissing fedgov meddling in this particular argument, is a fools' errand.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Robert and I have butted heads on a lot of issues in the past, so not sure what you're implying here.

  • ||

    Robert is making use of the inverse of the premise applied here, but it's just as conspiratorial.

  • Robert||

    You actually keep track of who you've butted head with here? I can't even remember the real names of people I meet IRL, let alone the screen names of people here. Well, unless people make a big enough deal of them, like Steve Smith's.

    Come to think of it, I can't even remember the substance of arguments here either. The only thing that stuck with me for a while was that I seemed to be the only enthusiast of cluster analysis vs. a priori rating of responses along a priori axes as ways of finding associations in public opinion.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Congress isn't going to pass that kind of regulation any time soon. The 2009-10 Democrat dictatorship is over.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    There's always the next dictatorship, and it might be another Democrat one.

    Or, just as bad... a Republican one.

  • DarrenM||

    Congress isn't going to pass that kind of regulation any time soon.

    You need to think of government actions coming from regulatory agencies, not Congressional legislation. While regulatory agencies receive their authority from legislation, once they have it, they have all the motivation to interpret that authority (which can be vague) as broadly as possible.

  • Robert||

    Then why did FDA at least twice fight off jurisdiction over tobacco products, starting in the 1950s? They went to court to fight citizen petitions requiring them to regulate cigarets. They didn't want that responsibility.

  • ||

    Here's some anecdotal evidence: I just asked six people, just for you guys, whether this would have any effect at all. All said that it wouldn't, and all said that they'd just buy more smaller Mars bars. Same as me.

    The moment Michelle becomes productive is the moment she fucks off and stops doing ridiculously, unfathomably stupid shit of this sort. 'Partnership for a Healthier America'? Maybe they should just start taxing calories, eh?

  • Tulpa the White||

    So Mars profits from selling more high-margin candy bars.

    Occam's razor says this is a profit-maximizing decision, not a govt-coerced one.

  • ||

    Read way above.

  • ||

    Or they are sucking up to Queen Michelle in the event her and her food Nazis get more regulatory power in an Obama second term. Of course they still have to make money so they will try to weasel around their promise to downsize.

    There was zero evidence taht king size bars weren't selling enough to make this purely a supply and demand decision.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    +several internets for you, ASM.

  • fried wylie||

    There was zero evidence taht king size bars weren't selling enough to make this purely a supply and demand decision.

    Hmmm, the article probably would've done well to cite some evidence in that regard, wouldn't it....

    But then what would tupla have to spend all day defending Obama with?

    Incompetence, or deliberate omission to drive the argument here in the thread?

  • ||

    Fine, Tulpa, that would be applicable if the FLOTUS and other favoured interest groups weren't claiming that candy bars were the nutritional Spawn of Satan, not unlike they do with soda pop. It would be like limiting the amount of cigarettes sold in a pack because smoking is unhealthy and even though you shouldn't smoke, smoking less is less unhealthy. I believe they tried this with eliminating "light" and "ultra-light" from the packaging. Also, the kerfuffle over the pictures of half a lung and trach patients on the packages? Who "encouraged" this BTW? Moreover, the FDA can outright ban cigarettes at any time they wish.

    The argument isn't maximizing profits; it's over how much direct and indirect influence fedgov, through direct threat and overtures of the threat of regulation, and FLOTUS has with the Bully Pulpit. It's quite sizeable. Not unlike the FLOTUS herself.

  • Tulpa the White||

    When the opinion of those in power and market incentives align, I consider that to be a noncoercive choice. It's only govt intervention when the two are not aligned.

  • ||

    This is where we diverge, Tulpington. I quit smoking because I chose to do so, not because FLOTUS or the FDA put a gun to my head. If I chose to still smoke, obtaining cigarettes is not a problem, and I haven't seen fedgov lighten up (ha!) on it's anti-smoking crusade, since so many states SCHIP programs depend on that revenue.

    Are you seeing a problem with this?

  • Tulpa the White||

    I'm not sure what you're trying to say. No dot-connecting is needed to determine that the cigarette market has govt intervention up and down. Cigarette taxes aren't market incentives.

  • ||

    No dot-connecting is needed to determine that the cigarette market has govt intervention up and down. Cigarette taxes aren't market incentives.

    Try telling that to the powers that be WRT both cigarettes and candy bars, since they are both considered harbingers of doom.

    The idea that either taxing something to death or the threat of doing so to reduce the prevalence of the offending product or behaviour is the First Commandment of commie statist progressives.

  • ||

    And I haven't stopped eating candy bars either. The point is: if it's so damn horrible, why not use the FDA and other alphabet soup agencies to BAN the offending stuff. Oh, that's right, it's worked so well with the WoD.

    Unless there is another reason to keep the offending stuff legal, and it sure as shit isn't liberty minded.

  • Tulpa the White||

    OK, this is kind of a strange soliloquy.

  • ||

    OK, this is kind of a strange soliloquy.

    Shorter Me:

    "Intent matters when control is paramount, not demonstrable results."

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Okay, you can call "boogeymen" on this, but the fact is:

    Missus Obama is trying to play Mother Hen to what she sees as "her" (our) children, and has done so since her hubby-unit got The Ultimate Ring of Power.

    In a just world, she would only care about the children she has, not try to set public policy for the children of We Mere Peons.

    That, in my book, is a damn fuck good reason to be suspicious of her motives, and of the reach of power she wants government to have.

    Sorry you can't see it.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I am suspicious of her. But my suspicion of Mars' decision being govt-caused is not as strong as my suspicion of that suspicion being BO-loathing-caused.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    I know you're not a liberal, but it's still disconcerting to see you defend Missus Obama.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I'm not defending her.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    "BO-loathing-caused" isn't a defense?

  • Tulpa the White||

    Saying I loathe someone so much that I want to believe any bad thing about them isn't a defense.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    You're assuming my despisement of Democrats is clouding my judgement of the Obamas.

    I have had a deep-rooted level of that plus mistrust, in right around 98% of ANY elected-official count at any given time. Maybe an even higher amount, but I'm going to be gracious and use the above figure.

    IMO, it's just good policy to expect the worst from those who are given power.

  • fried wylie||

    it's just good policy to expect the worst from those who are given power.

    Oh, puhleeez, Lord Acton was one of the most egregious conspiracynutdummies in all of history.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Not familiar with Acton, other than the fact that he existed.

  • fried wylie||

    Not familiar with Acton, other than the fact that he existed

    Notable quotations

  • Mr. FIFY||

    I am embarrass. I had no idea Acton coined the sensible phrase "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely".

  • Tulpa the White||

    "Power tends to corrupt" does not imply "everything I don't like is the result of power corrupting".

  • fried wylie||

    Pulled that implication out of your ass, huh?

  • Tulpa the White||

    It does smell pretty bad, but no.

  • fried wylie||

    the implication I took from the quote is that the degree of corruption is proportional to the degree of power.

    give someone more power, and you give them more incentive to be corrupt. therefore, "it's just good policy to expect the worst from those who are given power", expecting a worser "worst" the more power is granted.

  • Tulpa the White||

    The point is, the Acton quote is useless for determining whether a particular event is caused by corruption.

    I suspect all of us agree that Michelle Obama is a meatus.

  • SIV||

    Somebody has been to the health department.

  • fried wylie||

    The point is, the Acton quote is useless for determining whether a particular event is caused by corruption.

    No one made that claim. "it's just good policy to expect the worst from those who are given power" No determination, just suggesting skepticism of power, due to it's historically proven tendency to corrupt.

    And wtf is a meatus.

  • fried wylie||

    *its

  • Tulpa the White||

    And wtf is a meatus.

    We'll tell you on your wedding night.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    "Mission creep" ring a bell, Tulpa?

  • DarrenM||

    It's only govt intervention when the two are not aligned.

    But there's really no way to know if they are aligned or not. All we have to go on are public statements, which, I'm sure you know, are notoriously unreliable as far as getting the truth of a thing. We're only told what the speaker wants us to believe, not necessarily the facts of the matter.

  • Tulpa the White||

    The totality of the circumstances have to be taken into account; Mars' previous candy bar size reduction in the UK with the same "fig leaf" explanation, and the implausibility of regualtory threats, and the likely profit increase, and the low barriers to entry in the candy market would all seem to argue against this being a case of govt intervention.

  • fried wylie||

    Mars' previous candy bar size reduction in the UK with the same "fig leaf" explanation, and the implausibility of regualtory threats

    implausibility of regulatory threats WRT to unhealthy food in THE ORIGINAL FUCKING NANNYSTATE.

    Are you serious?!

  • Emperor Wears No Clothes||

    the implausibility of regulatory threats

    Tulpa the Troll, is more like it. Nobody could be that obtuse.

  • Robert||

    No, actually the law Congress passed a few yrs. ago specifically forbade FDA from banning cigarets.

  • ||

    "Occam's razor says this is a profit-maximizing decision, not a govt-coerced one."

    Occam's Razor applies just as well to "loss-minimizing," which does not exclude potential coercion.

    And while I'm on the subject: rolling with the punch is a leetle bit different from not being punched at all. The same point applies to getting the better of someone trying to intimidate you.

  • ||

    The way I see it Mars is just brown-noseing, watch them come up with a Snickers "share-sized" package, which contains two Snicker bars with one ostensibly to be shared.

    Market: infinity Government: zero

  • Tulpa the White||

    You know who else had a brown nose?

  • ||

    I would scream RACIST here, but I know you better than that.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Google "sin tax", just for starters.

    Also, this:

    http://abcnews.go.com/Health/W.....d=16353067

    Who sets tax policy, Tulpa? And which Team is more likely to buy into this kind of bullshit?

    Hint: They have most of the levers of power at their fingertips, right this minute.

  • fried wylie||

    Who sets tax policy

    Private Corpurashuns, you conspiracynutdummy!

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Chuck Schumer is a Private Corporashun?

    /snark

  • fried wylie||

    publicly traded, anybody with enough cash can own a controlling share of him.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    I'll offer to buy a share of his brain, after the autopsy.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    I have a thimble I found in some of my grandmas' stuff after she died... that should hold Schumer's brain nicely.

  • fried wylie||

    Back when I could eat candy, I preferred the funsizes. Oh, I still ate around a pound of them in a sitting (Yo, Fuck KingSize), but I got to enjoy a taste of everything (buy 4 different funsize mixed bags and empty them into a tupperware.)

    God I miss candy :(

    Also, fried chicken.

  • fried wylie||

    While this tactic may help avid Snickers eaters shed a few pounds

    Hilarious. *points at my comment above*

  • Robert||

    I've been cleaning up at Rite Aid on post-Easter candies from the clearance bin. Some of them are a bit squished, but at those prices, who cares?

  • DarrenM||

    I hope those wingnuts so paranoid about a 'right-wing theocracy' are happy with the left-wing version.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Right-wingers believe God should be part of government.

    Left-wingers believe government should be God.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    More stoopid:

    http://thenewamerican.com/usne.....ty-problem

    Excerpt:

    On May 7, 2012, White House chef Sam Kass, who is also the healthy-eating policy advisor to Michelle Obama and the White House, got into the act, stating to a group of healthcare officials that obesity threatens our national security:

    What motivates us is not just the fact that one in three Americans will have diabetes in their lifetime if we don’t change course, but the impact that it is having on our economy, on our health care system or our kids' ability to learn, It's not just the fact that obesity may be our nation’s greatest national security threat, although all those reasons are of vital importance….

    Why the hell does a non-elected spouse of a politician, have a "healthy-eating policy advisor"?

  • fried wylie||

    Why the hell does a non-elected spouse of a politician, have a "healthy-eating policy advisor"?

    Because exercise is, like, too much work, man. Layoff the lazysistah!

  • Mr. FIFY||

    I despise her as much as I did Bush's old lady. And Nancy Reagan.

    Spouses of presidents need to shut the fuck up and stay in the White House.

  • fried wylie||

    Spouses of presidents need to shut the fuck up and stay in the White House Kitchen.

    obvious, so obvious.

  • ||

    Maybe I wasn't paying attention, but what was Laura Bush's pet policy? I recall it being about teaching kids to read.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Read and abstain from anal fisting.

  • Emperor Wears No Clothes||

    Read and abstain from anal fisting.

    Holy sht that was funny.

  • SIV||

    Laura had the best First Lady pet cause. Something useful and non-coercive.

    Lefties would only acknowledge her achievement in youthful fatal auto accidents.

  • fried wylie||

    her achievement in youthful fatal auto accidents

    Thanks to Laura Bush, now we need laws against reading books while driving.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Still, even with the benevolent-ish cause of Laura Bush's, I still stand by my statement above.

    And that would go, of course, for any future First Male Spouse.

  • Robert||

    Thanks to Lady Bird, there's no reading matter out the window.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Just be glad he's hasn't been elevated to czar status.

  • Brian from Texas||

    Michelle Obama and the PHA all sound Red to me, meaning they prefer hammers and sickles to hamburgers.

  • ||

    By all means, call those little dealies "partnerships!" We need some indicator of fascist economic policies, and FevGov-business "partnership" will do quite nicely. Best we can hope for under the circumstances.

  • ||

    Tulpa, if you love Obama so much, why don't you just gay marry him? We already know bigamy is nothing new to that family, so you just have to watch for Presidential coitus interruptus dangers like Michelle sinking a blade into your back.

  • AlmightyJB||

    There is nothing the
    government can do about obesity. Nothing.

  • fried wylie||

    Ending crop subsidies and eliminating the food pyramid might help.

    But those are more along the lines of undoing-something, not doing.

  • Killazontherun||

  • sablegsd||

    I hate that stupid, racist, fugly beard.

  • Bruce Majors||

    It seems likely Michelle Obama's nutrition campaigns are just a way of covering up how inflation is raising food prices. Just as USDA decided pink slime was good for kids around 2001, so that when BLS compares today's burger prices to those 10 years ago they are comparing today's rotten apples to yesteryear's high quality oranges.

  • Malto Dextrin||

    Well now it's out in the open. The First Lady admits that size matters.

  • Hoofhearted||

    That's OK Mooche,I'll just buy 4 smaller sized Snickers,and I don't even like Snickers (snicker)
    Btw,how long before Mars candy is forced to put Dear Leader's picture on every Mars candy wrapper under threat of receiving a surprise visit from the Head Regulator's brownshirts in the IRS,OSHA,FDA and the EPA?

  • tim_lebsack||

    re: Michelle Obama's "Let's move!" program.
    I misunderstood. I was sending her money.

  • Combaticus||

    Why do you hate snowmobilers, Michelle?

  • Emperor Wears No Clothes||

    Well, since nobody else is gonna:
    Shouldn't Michelle focus on downsizing her ass?

  • vivian||

    thanks very much for this great post! chaussure lacoste

  • Nyarlathotep||

    Va t'faire enculer chez les grecques, Vivian.

  • Ed Zeppelin||

    I hate that b 1t c h

  • Ed Zeppelin||

    Well now it's out in the open. The First Lady admits that size matters.

    She doesn't get to enjoy a big one, so no one else gets to either

  • cheap sunglasses||

    Buying Cheap Sunglasses Cheap Sunglasses travel to here- sunglassescheap2u.com ,and you will get more brand sunglasses and eyeglasses online.


    We purchasing Wholesale Sunglasses frame being a whole lot is dependent upon what would be the frames on which the eyeglass were framed on. far better the sunglass frame far better can be the start looking from the eyeglass. Eyeglass frames are important to produce style assertion and include style quotient towards the prescription eyeglasses.

  • cheap sunglasses||

    New Era Hats cooperated with causes to industry this type of tow caps, which allured the interest of a whole lot of consumers.
    The red-colored bull hats has totally overthrown the sports activities tradition, also it is a whole lot more fashionable.

    wholesale Basketball Hats caps store have a great amount brands hats cps for wholesale.


    Shop cheap basketball hats caps , New Era Hats and others hats caps for your friends and family.order over 10 items free shipping.

  • دردشه عراقية||

    Thanks

  • tipuasher||

    a further brilliant post, I hope against hope save this in my Newsvine account. tolerate a awesome day.
    http://freefacebookcoins.info

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement