Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Alderman Sticks His Nose in Hot Oil
Chicago Alderman Edward M. Burke, having accomplished his longtime goal of banning smoking in the city's restaurants, wants to ban trans fats too--for the children.
VM|7.18.06 @ 4:50PM|#
goddamn spam filter. Check out CLTV.com for the cute story out of chicago today.
|7.18.06 @ 4:50PM|#
And people like Dan T. say that we're just hyperventillating
when we say that it'll come down to this level of gov't control
over the minutae of our lives...
This Burke character ought to be boiled in oil.
|7.18.06 @ 4:52PM|#
This guy is the biggest jackass in the Chicago City
council.
Although I do admire the fact that he comes right out and says what
many others wouldn't be so bold to say :
Burke countered that if the City Council can ban a liver delicacy
that most Chicagoans have never tasted and cannot afford, aldermen
"ought to be able to ban unhealthy oils. . . . This is cruelty to
human beings. Why not start here to talk about what government can
do to keep people more healthy?"
He is the fucking living embodiement of the slippery slope argument
against government regulation. "Cruelty to human beings" ??? Wow,
what an approriate use of hyperbole! Fuckin assclown.
|7.18.06 @ 4:57PM|#
And if the City Council had agreed to simply steer clear of
peoples? bad habits, said Mr. Burke, an influential alderman who
long pushed to ban smoking in indoor public spaces, Chicago might
never have passed the smoking ban that went into effect this year
(it gives taverns and restaurants with bars until 2008 to comply).
"We may be the last civilized city in the world to ban
it," he said.
WOW. I think he just called the most of the world uncivilized.
|7.18.06 @ 5:00PM|#
To me, this spells out in extreme detail just why it is that we
advocate limited government. Let idiots like this
pontificate from their pulpits all they want, but don't give them
the power to do anything. Better yet, make sure that there are
nasty consequences when they even try.
For the younglings.
VM|7.18.06 @ 5:04PM|#
CIVILIZED???
to other Chicago types here - when did we become
"civilized"???????
(I know - when people at Comisky--- er... the Cell -- began doing
the wave)
|7.18.06 @ 5:07PM|#
VM,
I dunno. I'm no Chicagoan, but I did go to law school there. If
that counts, then I think Chicago became civilized when Jake and
Elwood Blues drove through that mall in Harvey.
|7.18.06 @ 5:15PM|#
I'm having a revelation. It's better suited for the manliness
thread, but I'll post it here, since this thread revealed this
important truth to me: Manly men think that The Blues
Brothers is the best musical ever. By far. Excessively manly
men (two or more Y chromosomes) think it's the only
musical ever made. In fact, if you put them in front of a
performance of, say, A Chorus Line, they will see nothing
at all.
No other test of manhood is needed. I have spoken.
|7.18.06 @ 5:23PM|#
This guy is the biggest jackass in the Chicago City
council.
ChicagoTom,
Aren't you selling
Burt Natarus a little short?
|7.18.06 @ 5:34PM|#
highnumber,
I knew someone was gonna bring up Natarus...and quite frankly, you
have a point
The reason I chose Burke over Natarus as #1 douchebag is because
Burke is more of a banner whereas Natarus is more of a finer.
Although I wouldn't rule out awarding them both the prize as top
co-jackasses.
|7.18.06 @ 5:35PM|#
Wow. Seems like the Chicago City Council is almost nuttier than
San Fran's. Or Portland's.
Quite an accomplishment.
How the fuck do these nitwits get elected, anyhow? I've never been
able to understand that, even observing at close range...
|7.18.06 @ 5:36PM|#
Today, for the first time in history, the parasites
outnumber the producers who support them. They're entering a final
feeding frenzy, which will result in the ultimate evil - a
totalitarian state.
Anarky (D.C. Comics: Anarky, limited series)
VM|7.18.06 @ 5:39PM|#
How the fuck do these nitwits get elected, anyhow?
Comment by: Clean Hands at July 18, 2006 05:35 PM
HIER
hrumph.
/kicks kitten out of the way
|7.18.06 @ 5:44PM|#
I read something that said he was a master parliamentarian. Huh. I wonder if he's related to Edmund Burke? That would be really sad.
|7.18.06 @ 5:45PM|#
They have weighed a proposal to force cabbies to dress
better.
!!!
With what money??? Last time I checked, dressing nice costs a
pretty penny these days.
|7.18.06 @ 5:55PM|#
They have weighed a proposal to force cabbies to dress
better.
It wasn't just to dress better, it was a fucking dress / hygiene
code.
The Chicago City Council and mayor Daley believe that nothing is
off limits. They had proposed mandating all businesses be forced to
install indoor and outdoor cameras for any business open more than
12 hours a day and bars that remain open until last call -- all on
the business owner's dime. Business licenses would be affected if
you didn't comply.
They are fucking bat-shit insane, and that is the biggest reason I
refuse to move into the city, and instead prefer the surrounding
suburbs.
|7.18.06 @ 5:57PM|#
Well, smacky, in our system of government, we give large
percentages of our money to people to spend on whatever suits their
fancy. Who are these people? Why, they're whoever was most popular
for one day that we call "Election Day". Then we generally keep
them for decades. We like people with familiar names especially
well.
Some think we should give all of our money to these people to
spend. Because if they had all of it, why, they would spend it on
something other than tuxes for cabbies. Because they are wise, and
we are dumb.
|7.18.06 @ 6:09PM|#
Friggin' 708er :)
Things were so much easier when there were only a few area
codes.
|7.18.06 @ 6:12PM|#
So, I've been thinking. Throwing libertarian concerns aside for
the City of Chicago gov't, let's look at it like a kingdom. Of
course, hizzoner is the king. The alderman are his vassals. His
staff are the court. (Natarus serves double duty as both a vassal
and the court jester.)
Do you think that since Daley rules with such an iron fist, leaving
no real decisions to the council, that they come up with these
ridiculous proposals to puff themselves up? Maybe Daley lets them
get away with some of this much like a man eating steak throws his
dog a bone.
So I ask, if we had a weaker regent do you think the city would be
better off? (Don't tell me that we should have a true democracy
instead. This IS Chicago. We've never had that, and only too
recently you've seen on the world's stage what happens when that is
forced on a people too soon.)
|7.18.06 @ 7:13PM|#
(Don't tell me that we should have a true democracy instead. This IS Chicago. We've never had that, and only too recently you've seen on the world's stage what happens when that is forced on a people too soon.)
I dunno, I think it'd be good to see CNN coverage of people in the
street beating a torn-down statue of Mayor Daley. (Any Mayor Daley,
I'm not particular...)
|7.18.06 @ 7:28PM|#
I'm hoping to see Pat Fitzgerald beating the real Mayor Daley in
the coming days (metaphorically speaking, of course).
This city is run like a feudal system. The aldermen have their own
little fiefdoms and Daley has complete authority to do whatever he
wants, but I give him credit for this statement (from the article):
"Is the City Council going to plan our menus?" Mayor Daley
asked.
|7.18.06 @ 7:54PM|#
Marcvs,
Supposing Pat FitzGerald does take Daley down, what then?
(I live about 5 blocks outside the city limits, so I have a
different perspective than someone living within. If they let
suburban voters pick the mayor, Daley would have no competition,
because Daley has kept the city a great place to visit.)
Do you remember the power struggles between the Daleys' reigns?
Might big city (or at least Chicago's) gov'ts function best when
they are ruled by a benevolent dictator? Is corruption an
inevitable by-product?
What big cities are run by hands-off mayors?
I have trouble viewing municipal gov'ts with a libertarian eye,
because I envision them disappearing if they aren't needed for
trash pick-up, parking enforcement, zoning, etc. What would a big
city gov't become if it were run by libertarians?
|7.18.06 @ 8:08PM|#
Chicago has elections? Wow, I thought all the political positions in Chicago were inherited for life until bequeathed to an heir (post Democratic primary, of course). Don't you need something like a million signatures to get on the ballot there, unless you're an incumbent?
|7.18.06 @ 8:18PM|#
Having recently completed my very first visit to Chicago, I wonder if it's possible to block this jackass' plan by claiming that trans fats are part of Chicagoan religious observance, the same way peyote is part of religious ritual for some Native American sects? I found Gino's East to be a very convincing shrine in which to worship whole-milk mozzarella, red wine sauce, and sausage patties, myself. Jeebus, a dog and an order of cheese fries at Portillo's is the equivalent of holy communion, AFAIC.
|7.18.06 @ 9:23PM|#
If you need to know:
Stainless steel screw manufacture large panels heat interchanger
fractionating tower
|7.18.06 @ 9:38PM|#
Natarus. Natarus. That spells Suratan backwards. Hmmm.
Gino's East is yummy. There's nothing like Chicago pizza. It can't
be adequately duplicated elsewhere, either. I think Chicago pizza
requires a certain amount of corruption to really taste good :)
|7.18.06 @ 10:10PM|#
This city is run like a feudal system.
Would it be alright if we compared Chicago residents to serfs, or
would that cause some blog drama?
|7.18.06 @ 10:58PM|#
Would it be alright if we compared Chicago residents to
serfs..?
Part of serfdom is high taxes, right?
Well, have you ever bought cigarettes within the city limits?
|7.18.06 @ 11:57PM|#
Yeah, let's start a discussion on serfdom, pro and con...
You know my position.
I am con if serfs are former free agentss.
I am pro if serfs are former chattel slaves.
(Both of which cases were true in the particular instance of the
European serfdom).
But Chicago residents are not tied to the soil, thus they are no
true serfs..
Dan T.|7.19.06 @ 9:47AM|#
And people like Dan T. say that we're just hyperventillating
when we say that it'll come down to this level of gov't control
over the minutae of our lives...
I still think that - this is a case of government regulating
business, not the minutae of your life. Generally speaking, life is
better with somebody making sure that the food you buy is going to
meet a certain health standard.
Look at all the misplaced anger on this thread - over a proposed
resturant health regulation? I bet most of you don't even live in
Chicago so why is it even any of your business?
|7.19.06 @ 10:12AM|#
bet most of you don't even live in Chicago so why is it even
any of your business?
Why get mad about stonings in Africa or beheadings on Saudi
Arabia..I bet most of you don't live there!
Why get mad about the war in Iraq? I bet most of you aren't in the
military!
If you think that regulating the OIL that restaurants can use isn't
dictating minutiae, I feel sorry for you.
Dan T.|7.19.06 @ 10:17AM|#
Why get mad about stonings in Africa or beheadings on Saudi
Arabia..I bet most of you don't live there!
Why get mad about the war in Iraq? I bet most of you aren't in the
military!
Those are basic human rights issues - I can't imagine that you're
so lacking in perspective as to think those sort of things are
equal to the way a city chooses to regulate its resturants.
I would think that if you don't live in Chicago, you would want the
people who do live there to determine how to best run their
city.
If you think that regulating the OIL that restaurants can use
isn't dictating minutiae, I feel sorry for you.
I'm still mad that I can't get a good can of Mercury-laden tuna
anymore!
|7.19.06 @ 10:33AM|#
I'm still mad that I can't get a good can of Mercury-laden
tuna anymore!
Try to be a hypocrite in the same post:
Dan T. "I can't imagine that you're so lacking in perspective as to
think those sort of things (ed: like mercury in tuna) are equal to
the way a city chooses to regulate its resturants."
hoisted by your own petard, m'boy
Dan T.|7.19.06 @ 10:43AM|#
Dan T. "I can't imagine that you're so lacking in
perspective as to think those sort of things (ed: like mercury in
tuna) are equal to the way a city chooses to regulate its
resturants."
hoisted by your own petard, m'boy
It was probably not best example, but the point is that the
government has a long and mostly successful history of regulating
what can be sold to us in our food. Most people neither consider it
a civil rights violation nor would want to go back to the way it
was before when anybody could sell you anything.
|7.19.06 @ 10:52AM|#
Those are basic human rights issues -
If what you eat isn't a basic human right, then I don't know what
is.
I can't imagine that you're so lacking in perspective as to
think those sort of things are equal to the way a city chooses to
regulate its resturants.
I can't believe you're so lacking in intelligence as to think that
the restaurants belong to the city.
I would think that if you don't live in Chicago, you would want
the people who do live there to determine how to best run their
city.
We do.
Dan T.|7.19.06 @ 11:01AM|#
If what you eat isn't a basic human right, then I don't know
what is.
And people are free to eat anything they want, as far as I know. In
this case, the issue is what we are going to allow people to serve
to others.
I can't believe you're so lacking in intelligence as to think
that the restaurants belong to the city.
Nobody's saying that the resturant is owned by the city government,
but obviously a resturant located in Chicago is part of the city of
Chicago. Either way, it's a perfectly legitimate function of
government to regulate business transactions.
|7.19.06 @ 11:14AM|#
Either way, it's a perfectly legitimate function of
government to regulate business transactions.
Explain that, please. You can't just make that statement without
some sort of justification.
|7.19.06 @ 11:25AM|#
1) people are free to eat anything they want
2) what we are going to allow people to serve to others
3) it's a perfectly legitimate function of government to regulate
business transactions.
If you can't see what happens when you put all those together, then
I feel sorry for you. People are free to eat what they want(#1)?
Really? Just how are they supposed to do that?
The most common ways are to buy it and cook it (see #3) or to have
someone else cook it and then buy it(see #2).
Guess you think people should go back to the farm (oops - #3
again). Ah, I've got it!!! They can wave a magic wand.
Yes, you are saying the city owns the restaurants. At least in
part. If you're willing to get off your Statist horse, I might try
to explain it to you.
|7.19.06 @ 11:32AM|#
the government has a long and mostly successful history of
regulating what can be sold to us in our food.
Although this isn't what you meant, I would say you're right, they
have been successful at regulating it. Learn to write.
What you meant, and what requires evidence, is that government's
regulations have lead to safer food and that said regulations were
necessary in the first place. That's your assertion, and I note you
provide no evidence to prove it.
GIVE ME A LINK!
|7.19.06 @ 3:11PM|#
It's about time somebody stood up to Big Fat.
I think they should outlaw that niche porn that has chubby people
in it, so we can stand up to Big Fat Fuck.
|7.19.06 @ 3:28PM|#
If they outlaw Trans Fat, can we go back to having our fries
cooked in lard and beef tallow the way they used to be?
Standing up to Big Fat: If they do that, innocent actors and
comedians like Monique, Louis Anderson and Ralphie May will be out
of a job. Big Fat = More Jobs!!
|7.19.06 @ 4:18PM|#
Fat Doug's in
Chicago cooks their fries in duck fat.
"There are no two finer words in the English language than 'encased
meats,' my friend."
|7.19.06 @ 4:40PM|#
Did I just call it "Fat Doug's"?
I got fat on the brain! (Good thing that.)
It's Hot Doug's.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245