Food Policy

Americans Support Food Freedom by a Wide Margin

A new poll finds Americans oppose food bans by a 5-1 margin and food taxes by a 2-1 margin. Supporters of food freedom should take note-and maybe even a victory lap.


A new poll finds Americans have little stomach "for policies that would constrain consumer choices…such as limits on the amount or type of food that can be purchased or taxes on unhealthy foods or drinks."

The national poll of more than 1,000 U.S. adults, released last week by the Associated Press/NORC Center for Public Affairs Research at the University of Chicago, contains several "[s]ignificant findings" that bolster the case for food freedom.

Respondents expressed universal opposition to food bans and taxes. While opposition to bans on marketing "unhealthy foods aimed at children" only trumped support slightly, opponents of taxing those same foods outnumbered supporters by a nearly 2-1 margin, and those who opposed "[l]imiting the types or amounts of foods and drinks people can buy" outnumbered supporters of food bans by a startling 5-1 margin (74 percent to 15 percent).

Furthermore, when asked whether maintaining a healthy weight was something "the whole community, including the schools, government, health care providers, and the food industry should deal with," less than one-third of respondents favored that approach, while 52 percent stated this was "something individuals should deal with on their own."

The study reveals 97 percent of respondents believe the most likely cause of obesity is sedentary inactivity related to "TV, video game[s] and computer[s]."

While I don't claim to know the root cause(s) of obesity, this strong belief among respondents that Americans are obese because we sit on our butts too much has been echoed by research. For example, in a 2005 article in the Annual Review of Public Health, "Economic Causes and Consequences of Obesity," researcher Eric Finkelstein and his colleagues looked at the results of four previous obesity studies and found "[t]he published evidence, although not conclusive, suggests that technology may be primarily responsible for the obesity epidemic."

Amazingly, the very same study by Finkelstein was later used as the sole scientific basis of New York City's soda ban.

When I filed comments this past summer on behalf of Keep Food Legal and its members in opposition to the ban, I blasted it in part because, I wrote, "the only evidence" New York City's health department had cited as a basis for the proposed ban was Finkelstein's "2005 Annual Review of Public Health journal article" which, I argued, "might better be used to support a ban on iPhones, televisions, or public transportation."

While the AP/NORC poll can be used to further bolster the case for food freedom against disingenuous, restrictive policies like that adopted in New York, it also provides a welcome counter to some recent frank research with which I nonetheless have taken issue.

In a column last summer, I expressed skepticism over the results of a survey research paper authored by Prof. Jayson Lusk, who concluded "that a majority of respondents can be classified as 'food statists'… who support 'more government action in the realm food and agricultural relative to the status quo.'"

I offered largely anecdotal opposition to Lusk's conclusion, writing that "people who champion food freedom… make up a much larger percentage of the population than this research would indicate."

While I didn't need a poll to tell me that what I see every day in my own work reflects a larger consensus across the country, I'm nonetheless grateful that the AP/NORC poll results do reflect this reality. And though the poll has so far received little fanfare beyond an AP article (hardly unexpected), I believe the poll results are a welcome shot in the arm for supporters of the food freedom movement—and a shot across the bow of its opponents.

Those opponents are legion in academia, public health, and the media.

Two days after the AP/NORC published its poll results, an op-ed calling for increased regulation of the food supply appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle.

The author, Dr. Robert Lustig, urged the FDA to cap the amount of added sugar that can appear in any foods.

That same day, New York Times columnist Mark Bittman called for "anti-tobacco-style legislation" to combat food advertisers and celebrity endorsers like Beyoncé Knowles who "think it's O.K. to sell soda."

Bittman also appealed in his column to "public opinion" to help turn the tide against food freedom and in favor of restrictions on food and food marketing.

Thanks to the AP/NORC poll, we can all be more certain on which side of the debate public opinion rests.

NEXT: FBI's Role in Terror Defendant's Actions Raised at Trial

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 or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I like eels
    Except as meals
    And the way they feels

    1. Seneca wrote of a certain patrician who was known for feeding slaves who displeased him to a pool of large eels.

      1. It was Vedius Pollio who used to feed his slaves to the lampreys (which I don’t think are technically eels) he kept in pond.

        That is a horror movie caliber way to day by the way.

        1. Pollio? Were his slaves paralyzed with fear?

            1. Such an evil man, he seems to be some kind of El Pollio Diablo…

        2. I just reread the passage and you’re right. It made me wonder if anyone matched the Romans for inventive cruelty.

          1. The Ancient Egyptians and Ancient Greeks could be pretty creative with torture and death. The Brazen Bull and covering people in honey and staking them to ants nest are both pretty cruel.

            Middle Ages Europe came up with some grisly shit as well. Let’s not leave the Chinese out either with water torture and Death by a Thousand Cuts.

    2. Reminds me of that scene in The Tin Drum.

  2. …might better be used to support a ban on iPhones, televisions, or public transportation.


    I don’t know the root cause of obesity either, although I suspect it is some combination of eating too much, eating the wrong things and lack of activity. You could probably throw genetics in the pot, too. What I do know is that obesity has been identified as a problem, and once something has been identified as a problem, the government must fix it. Especially when that problem has been blamed for costing the government money.

    1. Ah, but IpHones and government transportation are SWPL.

      They’ll only ban stuff the Snooki Class likes.

      1. They’ll only ban stuff the Snooki Class likes.

        The woman who keeps getting arrested? I still haven’t figured out why she’s famous.

    2. “the government must fix it”

      I think you’ve hit on something here the article doesn’t address. Whatever AP polls tell you, the fact remains that when people are given the chance to participate in elections, the only polls that have consequences, people continue to vote for parties that support regulation of food. The Libertarian party, the only one which runs on an anti-regulatory platform, garners at most 1% of the popular vote.

  3. thanks for these info. visit our web on Training Center Semarang.
    please comment to improvement.

    success for you all.


    1. Thank you for this information. Please visit this or any similar website before spamming here again: ESL-English as a Second Language

      I wish you success in your endeavor.


      1. You’re thanks comment to improvement.

    2. I liked Anonbot better.

      1. At least the new guy isn’t a pedo.

        1. Yeah well that reduces his entertainment value.

    3. success for you all.

      Even the serial killers?

      1. I thought this was a website for serial killers? Now I’m confused.

        1. Look at the headline: It’s cereal killers.

  4. OT: Senator Feinstein failed to secure the website and now it’s a pro-gun site.

    1. I love the anti-gun comment there “if giving up the 30-round magazine for your Glock pistol (not the pistol itself or the 9-shot clips, just the high-cap clip) meant preventing another Sandy Hook-style massacre, why wouldn’t you do it?”

      It wouldnt Itchy Ike, you dipshit. That is the reason we oppose all such bullshit arguments. Geez.

      1. Started sipping the whiskey last night. Thanks again, man.

        1. My pleasure brother. Enjoy.
          That was the best stuff I could get my hands on around here. I think I might make a run in a bit and acquire some for myself. Drowning in rain here so cant really do anything else.

  5. We will return you to your regularly-scheduled program in just a moment, but first a word from:
    “ who recently rated it a “broken promise” of his first term.”
    Someone other than Fox finally admits he’s a lying asshole.…..188343.php

    And then,
    “If you’ve ever wondered how to make a billion dollars vanish, see Gov. Jerry Brown’s budget proposal.”
    That’s only one of the lies required to “balance” CA’s budget…..188093.php

    And now, back to your program….

    1. Someone other than Fox finally admits he’s a lying asshole.

      Of course they only notice because he failed to punish the wealthy. When it comes to things that matter, like his evisceration of the 4th Amendment, they don’t give a shit.

    2. In the third story down

      The Golden State lost a treasure this week with the passing of Huell Howser, the public TV fixture who made countless programs about the obscure and fascinating people and places of California.

      If we could, we would introduce a bill to build a statue of the guy – microphone and sunglasses included – on the Capitol grounds.

      Billions of dollars in the hole and the Chronicle writer still wants the state to pay for more trinkets. How about just getting a group of private citizens to band together and pay for it themselves? Wait, it’s California. And the United States. No answer needed.

      1. On top of that, I’ve lived here for more than 40 years and never heard of the guy.
        But then if I have the remote, the TV is pretty much limited to football and some auto racing.

  6. So 1/3 of people polled think ‘unhealthy foods aimed at children’ should be taxed, and half that number ( 1/6 ) think that unhealthy foods should be banned or restricted, and about 1/3 think maintaining a healthy weight is something “the whole community, including the schools, government, health care providers, and the food industry should deal with,”.

    Who. the. fuck. are. these. people??!

    I know, I know, the T o n ys of the world. Little statist shit weasels who cant think for themselves and think no one else can either. Or sadistic little control freaks who get pleasure out of punishing and controlling other people’s lives.

    I happen to know one personally. She is a middle aged professional. She garners no respect at her office and is just competent enough to keep from getting fired. She has no man in her life anymore. I used to work with her x-boyfriend and he told me once ” If she didnt have a pussy she would be totally useless”. Wow.

    1. On the occasions I have had to talk to her personally I found her to be a borderline imbecile. Her personal life is hopelessly fucked up, her personal economic situation dire ( due to stunningly bad decisions made in the past, against my advice I should add ) . She is a full supporter of obama and any left-wing policy. She supports bloomturd’s soda ban and thinks it should be nation-wide.

      In spite of her supporting left-wing policies she is now crying about taxes going up? She doesnt think she can make it. She just cant see the connection. I cant help but laugh.

      Oh, and fuck character limits.

      1. You mean her character limits?

        1. I missed that one. You made me laugh.

      2. She supports bloomturd’s soda ban and thinks it should be nation-wide.

        Lemme guess, she’s also a giant fattie.

        1. A fattie yes. My wife has margarita night every tuesday with a bunch of girls from work and this woman is one who shows every single time. I think it is her entire social life. I have to be friendly to her but I do despise her.

          I am the designated driver so I have been tormented by this every tuesday night for years now.

          1. I am the designated driver so I have been tormented by this every tuesday night for years now.

            The cure for this malady is to pick up the phone, and pick a single number, say 3, then dial it 7 times in a row. Almost surely, you will soon thereafter have a car with a little light on it show up, and the person in that car will gladly drive that fat bitch home for a small fee.

        2. Lemme guess, she’s also a giant fattie

          THIS is why I think soda and/or junk food bans should only be for overweight people. Like you gotta get on a scale before you buy, rather than show ID.

      3. My wife’s old roommate who’s heart bled all over the place once helped her artist friend cheat on her taxes because “the government takes too much of our shit already.”

        This was post Bush tax cuts by the way. And she supports universal health care.

        This is why we’re effed.

        1. We’ve all said it hundred times. Liberty for me but not for thee.

      4. “against my advice I should add”

        It was kind of you to give her sound advice even though you don’t respect her. That shows character. Too bad she didn’t follow it. She sounds like she needs help.

    2. Aw, c’m’on…ask leading questions, and you’ll get answers in favor of anything you list.

  7. Does it belong on the gun metaphor thread or this thread when I say that someone ought to put a bullet in Michael Bloomberg’s head?

    1. It’s appropriate on this thread. In fact, spreading the message that Michael Bloomberg should get a bullet to the head is appropriate almost everywhere. For instance, instead of the usual holiday cards we send to family and friends, last year we sent “Kill Mayor Bloomberg” cards. I usually buy a half-page ad in the local High School yearbook to promote my real estate business. This year, instead of “Building a Home for Long Beach” or something, I’m going with, “Peel Michael Bloomberg’s Cap Back”.

      What’s important here, Sloopy, is that we get the message out that Michael Bloomberg is a hypocritical, obtrusive, little fascist and that someone ought to put a bullet in his head. Or a shovel in neck.

      1. Hey, are you and V heading up to Burbank for this today? We were thinking of heading down.

        1. In all seriousness, though, when are you guys gonna head up here for a visit? I’ll let you kill a pig.

  8. OT: Interesting story into the alleged Christmas Tree bomber’s defense tactics for his impending trial.

    FTA: “In America, we don’t create crime,” defense attorney Steve Sady said. “The FBI cannot create the very crime they intend to stop. And sometimes, it’s just a matter of going too far.”

    That would be a good defense in a sane and just world. Too bad it won’t work here.

    1. God, I wish I was on that jury.

  9. So, I’m sitting here idly jumping from channel to channel. I know better, but I check to see what has given Melissa Harris Perry’s RACISM SQUAD! the flutters this morning. They are talking about Haiti, and the earthquake, and what a gigantic clusterfuck the “recovery effort” has been.

    Guess what- these people are constitutionally incapable of imagining any sort of widely dispersed cooperative action on the part of individuals. The whole discussion is about centralized top-down action on the part of governments and NGOs. The term “property rights” was never uttered.

    They do seem to recognize on some superficial level the parasitic nature of the NGO-verse, but only insofar as they siphon donations away from the government, and usurp the authority of axctual government central planners.

    1. Most people don’t truly understand the fundamental point of Darwin’s arguments, that is, design, and teleology in general, doesn’t need a “mind” to direct the process.

      If they can’t understand the theory in its original context, how could they ever hope to understand its application in other spheres of human experience?

      1. This deserves a 1000+ post thread of it’s own. Excellent point.

      2. There’s an enormous problem with the term “natural selection”, which most people don’t realize is a metaphor.

  10. On the occasions I have had to talk to her personally I found her to be a borderline imbecile.

    This reminds me of the time somebody suggested I go see this woman manager of a local business about a screen printing job. After a long and utterly fruitless “discussion” I finally managed to extricate myself and stagger out of the building, That woman is seriously one of the dumbest people I have ever spoken to. How she can perform any task more intellectually demanding than sweeping floors escapes me.

    1. Some people are like idiot savants. They can perform one or a limited number of tasks just fine but other than that they are clueless.

      1. Unfortunately that one task is usually getting/making someone pregnant.

      2. Some people are like idiot savants. They can perform one or a limited number of tasks just fine but other than that they are clueless.

        I see you met a good number of professors then.

        In my experience in academia, professors are fucking brilliant when confined to their small avenue of study, and get exponentially more stupid as they stray from it.

        A medieval lit prof will be excellent with medieval lit. In other kinds of literary interpretation he will be competent, though, understandably, short on codicological details or some other technical aspect of literary interpretation. Outside of literary interpretation they are utterly useless because they don’t seem to have the capability of understanding that being smart in one field does not make you smart in any other. They seem to think that “I am a brilliant literary theorist” = “I have a better sense of what should be public policy than those who are not as smart as I am.”

        1. In my experience in academia, professors are fucking brilliant when confined to their small avenue of study, and get exponentially more stupid as they stray from it.

          And that’s different from any other person how?

          The polymath was rare to begin with, so much more so now that disciplines of knowledge themselves have become deeper and more specialized.

          1. It’s the attitude.

            Most people are well aware of their intellectual or factual limitations. Professors are not. They seem to think that their degree in art history makes them more qualified than I am to decide how big a drink I can have. Your average car mechanic or sales manager doesn’t.

      3. Problem is they get to vote…and fuck up my life!

  11. I’ve honestly been in a pissy mood since I heard that David Gregory is apparently above the law. Not only have things of that nature always deeply disturbed me, I keep getting into arguments at poor times with obnoxiously obtuse Obama apologists, the last of which claimed that DEA raids on medical marijuana were a “Bush-era policy” that had had ended when Obama took office. This happened a few days ago, not 2009. I just can’t believe how often I seem to run into this.

    1. I think it was Epi who pointed out the other day how drastically the social and political climate has changed in the last 20 years. No longer are pols accountable to their supporters. They can tell outrageous lies and put the most egregious behavior on full display and their supporters will simply make excuses for them and rationalize it away.

      In short, We. Are. Fucked.

      1. Yep,

        That’s going to be Obama’s true legacy.

        I noticed it to a lesser degree among Republican friends that supported Bush around the 04 election.

        But Obama’s dialed it up to 11. And now that politicians know they can lie their asses off with no one calling them on it, they’ll all do it.

        1. And now that TEAM BLUE politicians know they can lie their asses off with no one calling them on it, they’ll all do it.


        2. Th problem is, when you know the candidate you back is the lesser of evils, how do you come off enthusiastic when you politick among others to back your choice, when they may be less motivated to vote at all?

      2. Why do you think “pols…can tell outrageous lies and put the most egregious behavior on full display” while “their supporters…make excuses for them and rationalize it away”? Could it be because those supporters are afraid to acknowledge their own powerlessness? Or could it be unwillingness to admit a mistake?

        There’s a psychologic investment in any choice. I remember some years back having been part of a group political decision to back a certain candidate over another, and a few years later we pretty much realized we’d all made the wrong choice in that case. It was interesting how we could agree, change judgment after a few years, and wind up agreeing again. I don’t remember what it was that had us agree on the one over the other — and it was far from unanimous — but fortunately we stayed friendly with both of them.

    2. David Gregory is a member of the Ruling Class. The law does not apply to him. Now it does apply to Adam Meckler, who was arrested, jailed, and charged under the exact same law for accidentally carrying some 9mm magazines into the District.

      Meanwhile, the motherfucking idiots over at HuffingPaint chortle and derp at each other at this clear demonstration that America is a goddamn oligarchy because all that matters to their tiny little pissant brains is TEAM!

      Tommygun264 2Q2BSTR8 2609 Fans
      15 hours ago (10:26 PM) I’m much more offended by the way Gregory constantly allows radical right wingers like Newt Gingrich to come on his show and spout demonstrable lies without ever questioning them week after week.

      runamokinjun peacepipe-or warpath ? 622 Fans
      14 hours ago (11:49 PM) cheney doesn’t actually ‘ eat ‘ live babies , per se , he unhinges his jaw

      and swallows them hole — now romney’s another story ….

      sepblues Truth Avenger 219 Fans
      17 hours ago ( 8:23 PM) That empty clip would have looked good upside La Pierre’s head… I’d have paid Gregory’s bail…

      These motherfuckers deserve the fate they want which is to be serfs to the country formerly known as the United States of America, and I pray to FSM that I live long enough to see them marched off to the collectivized farms.

      1. How much of that is hyperbole? It’s not as though folks around here (me included) don’t come up with creative punishments for politicians quite frequently. (That’s not to say the HuffPo commenters are correct, just venting given their erroneous positions.)

  12. note to criminal types

    if you are carrying about an ounce of cocaine AND a stolen gun AND you are a convicted felon


    some douchebag pulls up next to you in a 35 mph zone and guns his engine at a red light challenging you to a RACE for your MANHOOD


    accept the challenge and speed through the 35 mph zone at speeds in excess of 80 mph

    because you might get arrested where if you had been driving normally you wouldn’t


    you no longer have your cocaine or your stolen gun or your freedom


    1. note to criminal types

      if you want to continue your lifestyle AND make a good salary AND get a sweet retirement plan


      deal drugs

      because you might get arrested

      instead go enroll at your local police academy


      you will then get to do all the cocaine you want and have a gun and your freedom


      1. And if you’re into tranny prostitutes, it’ll give you the freedom to unload your gun at them (after one of your buddies lets you walk away after brandishing a weapon) when they piss you off in traffic, and you’ll just get probation and keep your job!

        FTA (emphasis mine): Furr followed one of them into the CVS pharmacy at 400 Massachusetts Avenue, and continued to solicit one of the prostitutes. The store’s security officer, and off-duty D.C. police officer, asked Furr to leave.

        Outside the store, he pulled gun on one of the victims, who then reported the incident to the security officer at the pharmacy, charging documents said.

        After Furr identified himself as a police officer, the security officer ceased his investigation and let him go, prosecutors said.

  13. this guy is heroic. a “citizen” getting involved with keeping the streets safe, helping the local police and the community fight back against drunk drivers.

    video at link……..k-drivers/

    OUTAGAMIE COUNTY, Wis. ? It’s the ultimate citizen patrol; a Fox Valley man is doing his part to help get drunk drivers off the streets.

    Videos show a man following suspected drunken drivers while he calls 911 and waits for the police to arrive. He’s helped nab nearly 40 suspected drunk drivers and police say his efforts are a big help.

    Trouble viewing the video? Download Flash player here

    The man goes by the moniker “OWI Hunter” on Facebook where he posts videos showing an average citizen with a full time job who spends his weekend nights looking for drunk drivers.

    Brad is the OWI Hunter. He says saw too many stories about drunk drivers killing others in crashes and decided to do something about it.
    “What if I go out one night and if I see a car swerving or what not I could report it to the police, and it worked the first time, since then I’ve been involved in the arrest of 39 individuals for OWI,” Brad said.”…

    1. nobody likes a rat, dunphy

      1. he’s not a rat. he’s a hero. i realize a lot of reasonoids are apologists for drunk driving, … my favorite are those who think it shouldn’t be a crime unless somebody gets injured, but fortunately in the real world upstanding citizens don’t think like you do.

        a rat, like somebody getting paid to inform on drug deals or something like that is something else entirely. usually, they are involved in the activity and are trying to get some deal off their own punishment.

        this guy is a hero, going out on his own time, looking for dangerous crime in progress and stopping crime in progress that could harm innocents.

        if you don’t like this guy, you are part of the problem not the solution

        1. I don’t think people should drink and drive. it’s stupid and is almost as dangerous as driving while putting on makeup. But this guy’s a tattle tale.

          1. he’s a hero. he’s doing what i am so proud of my community for doing, acting in partnership with police to help solve crime and make the streets safer.

            the “cell phone dynamic” has changed law enforcement. while they are a benefit to criminals in a # of ways, they are also a benefit to crime enforcement, in that people call in crimes in progress more often, follow bad guys and give us updates and allow us to respond to IN PROGRESS details more often and catch bad guys more often.

            people in my community work with us, attending ‘citizen academy’, doing ride alongs and using their cell phones to keep the streets safer.

            this guy is “tattling” on in progress dangerous crimes. that is to be commended. frankly, if you suspect a drunk driver and you don’t call 911, you are almost as bad as the drunk driver. you are facilitating him being able to continue to place the community in danger, when a simple phone call could result in his apprehension, and possibly lives saved, injuries prevented etc.

            “tattling” to get out of responsibility for your own crimes (like doper informants) or something is another thing entirely. this guy is a hero

            1. I’m not allowed to be on my cell phone while I’m driving. If I pull over to make the call, I have lost him.

              1. if you are referring to using a cell phone while driving laws, every one i have ever seen makes an exception for emergency calls to police

                e.g. RCW 46.61.667

                (1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, a person operating a moving motor vehicle while holding a wireless communications device to his or her ear is guilty of a traffic infraction.

                (2) Subsection (1) of this section does not apply to a person operating:

                (a) An authorized emergency vehicle, or a tow truck responding to a disabled vehicle;

                (b) A moving motor vehicle using a wireless communications device in hands-free mode;

                (c) A moving motor vehicle using a hand-held wireless communications device to:

                (i) Report illegal activity;

                (ii) Summon medical or other emergency help;

                (iii) Prevent injury to a person or property; or

            2. And how many people have been pulled over by the cops on his “tips” that weren’t drunk?

              Remember, people, if you point out what you may think is the perpetrator of a crime, a police officer may well chase an innocent man without identifying himself and then slam that man’s head into the base of a wall (after the man stopped and put his hands up), causing him permanent brain damage and paralysis. And you, the taxpayer, will be forced to pay a $10M settlement and the officer will be free to continue working.

              And in continuing his career, he will smash somebody’s face into the ground, breaking his nose for legally filming police, causing another settlement.

              1. Obviously, Sloopy doesn’t understand the totality of the fact pattern.

                1. Neither does the King County, WA District Attorney.

                  At least as it pertains to obstruction of justice and withholding of evidence in the case.

                  FTA: “This reckless indifference in its failure to produce these three documents ? documents that were indisputably relevant ? is the functional equivalent of intentional misconduct,” Arend said of the failure to turn over the information after Harris’ family sued. The county settled with the family for $10 million in January 2011 in the midst of a civil trial in King County Superior Court.

                  If the cops covered up this, what else did they omit/cover up/distort in their investigation?

        2. Radley Balko is a hero.

          1. I really do miss Balko posting here, even though he’s doing God’s work at PuffHo. You see so few investigative journalists at the calibre of Balko these days.

            IMHO, Sullum really is the heart of H&R, though I admittedly disagree with some of his premises. Riggs, pretender to the throne, is a low-hanging fruit grabber, piss poor writer, and not fit to hold Sullum’s jockstrap, much less fill it. They should fire Riggs and bring back Lucy.

            1. I like Jesse Walker.

              I’m disappointed that Balko is now full-time at HP, since it’s an even more bloated and memory-hogging website than H&R.

              1. Sullum and Doherty are my favorites. Even if I have to read some of Brian’s stuff a couple of times before it makes sense. Lucy was ok but her pearl clutching was a little annoying. I used to really enjoy Nick’s writing but I think I’ve had my fill of his snark. As for Balko, I used to read/check The Agitator daily and now I check it maybe once a week. I can’t stand the HuffPo website.

            2. Oh, “piss poor writer”, good. I was afraid I was obtuse or had poor comprehension, but if you think Riggs is a piss poor writer, then I have a better excuse for scratching my head at a good portion of this article. I’ve been a fan of Jacob from the start, so any Riggs-Sullum comparison is unfair in my book, but objectively just on a technical basis, would you say Riggs’s writing is deficient?

              1. Ach! My fault entirely now, at least with keeping people straight — I see it’s Linnekin’s byline, not Riggs’s!

        3. Hey asshole, why don’t you pull over every woman putting on make up our anyone who seems a little tired? They’re just as dangerous as someone who’s .01 over the “legal” limit.

          And how the fuck does he “know” they are drunk over the limit?

    2. And this gal is the opposite of heroic. She has been terminated for faking DUI arrests in Utah. She has, incredibly, avoided prosecution for multiple counts of perjury, making false official statements, false arrest, kidnapping, assault with a deadly weapon and myriad other charges for her malfeasance.

      I guess it pays to commit your crimes on the other side of the thick blue wall.

      1. Why do you want drunk drivers to kill children?

    1. Just saw it. But come on, Wolfpack fans. Act like you’ve been there before.

      And be careful when you celebrate. We all know what cops do to fans that celebrate after their team beats Duke.

      1. now Michigan is the only undefeated team left.

        1. Until Tomorrow.

          1. I know it didn’t take me six minutes to post that.

            1. Anytime:)

              1. Nope. I need a few calories.

                On a related note, I drank one of these two days ago, and it was pretty good.

                Also, (puts on tinfoil hat,) no diet grape sodas exist because the government wants blacks to get diabeetus so it can control them.

                1. Better than the real thing


                2. I’ve always wondered why there was diet orange crush but no diet grape crush.

  14. but fortunately in the real world upstanding citizens don’t think like you do.


    1. Needz moar “Fearless Fosdick”. A “scumphy” wouldn’t hurt either.-)d

  15. you, the taxpayer, will be forced to pay a $10M settlement and the officer will be free to continue working.

    But it was just a tragic yet completely unavoidable accident! The HERO was not at fault, and did nothing wrong! That settlement was just a charitable gift on the part of kind hearted city officials and their legal counsel.

    f a police officer was injured in similar circumstances, the outcome would be the same.

  16. Needz moar

    I’m trying to cut down. It gets more attention than it deserves.

    Al Capp was a genius; just imagine Fearless Fosdick with a tank, black kommando fatigues and a grenade-launcher equipped MP4.

  17. Predictions for this weekend’s NFL playoff games:

    Denver 21 – 13 Baltimore
    Green Bay 28 – 21 San Francisco
    Seattle 24 – 28 Atlanta
    Houston 10 – 31 New England

    1. You thnk the Texans are going to get beat that bad?

      1. Yeah, I really do. And I fucking haaaaaaaaate Tom fucking Brady and the New England Patriots, but they’re just too good again this year.

        If I’m wrong about any game, I hope it’s that one.

        1. I wouldn’t mind seeing Peyton Manning with another brutal playoff performance.

        2. Yeah, I would love to see the Pats lose. Don’t want the Ravens to win either. And I hate Pete Carrol.

          1. I’m not a big fan of Pete Carroll either, but you can’t deny what he’s done. Only 9 players left from the roster he inherited and he’s built his team into exactly what he wanted them to be, and it’s working pretty well.

            As far as the Pats go, I just think Belichek is a doucher, and Tom fucking Brady went to scUM, so I hate him on principle.

            1. Pete Carroll is awesome. He’s like the anti-Saban. It’s nice to see a coach having fun while they are, you know, coaching a GAME.

            2. and it’s working pretty well.

              With help from Lance Easley.

    2. I do think whoever wins the Packers-49’ers game will go to the Super Bowl

  18. Furthermore, when asked whether maintaining a healthy weight was something “the whole community, including the schools, government, health care providers, and the food industry should deal with,” less than one-third of respondents favored that approach, while 52 percent stated this was “something individuals should deal with on their own.

    I happen to agree with that 52%, unless of course a patient is asking me for advice and when providing them care. I would be remiss in my duty to you if you are an unhealthy lardass and I FAIL to point this out to you when assessing your overall condition (remember, you are paying me for my honest opinion and assessment, and you may not like what I tell you).

    However, how much say so should:

    A) an insurer/underwriter, and/or

    B) an employer, ala employer provided medical insurance

    have in either directing or deciding what health habits are appropriate for their employees, e.g. smoking, so-called “illicit” drug use, diet, sexual behaviour, and other aspects of health*, since they are the ones underwriting/paying the bulk of your care?

    *Remember, “health” here is defined as the choices you make WRT to the congenital cards you have been dealt.

    1. I think A and B should both have a voice if there was a free market and idiotic insurance mandates and employer/employee regulations weren’t in place.

      I think an employer should be able to say, “I’m firing you because you’re a fat fuck that smokes and it will negatively effect our group rates.” That employer, of course, would have to weigh the consequences of that action IRT who will apply or stay working for them in the future, but that’s what the free market is all about.

      1. I actually agree with this. A consequence might be that “fat fucks who smoke” would agitate to find ways to get health care without needing insurance companies to be in the middle. Having that alternative, they could be hired by anyone, by opting out of group health insurance plans. Of course, the employee could always opt out of the company’s health care plan, but might not be able to attain affordable health care afterwards. What we need, I keep saying, is health care that is affordable and attractive on its own terms and by virtue of its own business model. Group health care seems to cause more problems than it solves. Sure, leave the people who want it alone, but don’t force others to pay for it, and make sure that the group plans don’t crowd badly needed alternatives out of the marketplace.

      2. Of course, in a free market situation, the employer probably wouldnt be paying for insurance anyway.

        But I do agree.

        Pro sports teams do it all the time. And not for affecting group rates, but for allowing yourself to get out of shape and sucking.

  19. Let’s remember that “Food Freedom” is only one aspect, though important, of the general “Self-Ownership” principle. If you own yourself, it is your right to use, treat, and maintain your body (or not use, treat, or maintain it) as you, alone, decide. If you are considered to be a (legally) competent individual, then nobody should be prevented from or prosecuted for assisting you in implementing your own, voluntary decisions. Out of those two statements comes Food Freedom, Drug Freedom (including the right to refuse treatment), freedom of occupation, the right to engage in dangerous leisure time activities, the right to suicide (or death with dignity), and so many others (even, as some have argued, the Right of Property). To sweep away libraries-full of counterproductive, useless, confusing law, I would add the right of self-ownership to the Constitution. It is at least as important as any of the other rights enshrined there.

  20. recent frank research

    Am I the only one who was puzzled by the passage including this, and wondering particularly what that could mean, and doubted it concerned hot dogs? A whole coupla paras. there were vague & confusing.

  21. Now that dude sure is talking a lot of smack!@ Wow.

  22. The results from the AP/NORC are really not that much different than what I previously found (also discussed in the story above). Here is my take on it:…..on-or-less

  23. I need this article to complete my assignment in the college, and it has same topic with your article. Thanks, great share!

  24. 2013 Happy New Year,NFL,NBA,fashion kickoff for u

  25. I wish to say thank you for an exciting web site about a subject I have had an curiosity in for some time now.

  26. I am really inspired from your blog hoping you will be there with more interesting post like this. Sohbet odalar?

  27. Thank you for the useful information that we avoid looking all over the web.Thank for sharing.

  28. I get it clear idea about your topic.Great stuff.

  29. It is so lucky to read your blog,it is full of useful message. I wish we both can do better in the future.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.