I have already admitted over on Facebook that I have a short fuse today, so sorry if you didn't get the warning there. But every once in awhile a thoroughbred has to kick out her stall.
Two things seem to inflame people: guns and Fritos. And if people catch a whiff that the government wants to regulate either, they cling bitterly to both (aliong with religion, seemingly, but that's another story).
I posted below about a proposed "sin tax" on junk food. If I did not make myself clear with my comments about the bureaucracy it would create (since one man's junk food is another's daily bread), let me make myself clear: I do not support such a tax. I don't want the State regulating my health. If someone wants to spend more of their hard-earned dollars (or hell, even welfare dollars, which is why I give to winos because if I need a buzz now and then and I've got a home, then they probably could use one even more) on a vending machine than at their local grocers, great - just have the decency to avoid wearing spandex in public. If Gary Busey et. al. want to leave their brains along a stretch of interstate because they don't like motorcycle helmets, fine - just have the decency not to wipe out during rush hour and spoil my commute. If someone wants to smoke crack until no teeth are left and their face is more pockmarked than the surface of Mars after an asteroid shower, super - just stay out there in Fontucky, will ya?
First of all, as much as you gnash your teeth, taxes will be with us. Taxation, in general, is needed. I enjoy drving on paved roads and I want to see our military earn a paycheck. And you know what, government interference is not always a bad thing - it is good to see nutritional information on the sides of boxes and cans, rather than live in, say, a large unnamed country to the immediate south of us where I can use a small child from Tijuana as a shield during dental check-ups for the amount of lead in his/her little cuerpo from all the candy produced down there.
But if the tax be imposed upon the "junk food", yea, although we liketh it not, then I sayeth smite the manufacturers and perhaps they shall see the error of their ways, and lo, they shall marketeth new products of wholesomeness upon the Lord's people.
Because frankly, folks, I can't trust us (and I am throwing myself in there) to be the market drivers here. We are getting fat and/or hormonally imbalanced from all the sugar-honey-iced-tea (that's "shit" for the slow on the uptake) put in foods. And we don't seem to mind. We buy our kids Lunchables and we pop that Lean Cuisine into the microwave and we scarf down the fat-free Newtons without giving any thought to reading the labels . . . because it's fast and convenient.
And we need that convenience! Because we are so "overwhelmed" and if people just understand how stressed out we are, they would see why my microwave is so important to meeeeeeeeee . . . and they'd also understand why I can't put on a dress to go to church (it's toooo hooooottttt) and why I had that affair (she wasn't fulfilling meeeeeeeee) and so on, and so on.
And I am guilty as charged. I mean, sure, I could take a longer walk with my dogs and the kids, but Good Eats is on!
Guns are your right . . . Fritos are your luxury. If you want to compromise your health (and note I said compromise, not ruin, because such a luxury is a good thing now and then to enhance our lives, but like it or not, it will always come at a price, no matter how small), don't fall into the mindset that you're doing it to show that damn nanny state a thing or two . . . you're eating it because you like it.
8 comments:
Well you got my vote. I think your arguement makes perfect sense.
I still think you're encouraging these government ****s. ****s rhymes with ducks, and it is a most satisfying appellation when applied to anyone in government. Particularly anyone in government at the moment.
That's how we get into this crap. RINO republicans think they can "hammer out a compromise on health care." I don't want the RINOS "compromising" on anything. Let these demo****s OWN IT.
If the wee-wee-in-chief wants to lead the way on health care he can be the first one to demonstrate taking a long walk off a short pier -- preferrably with a millstone around his wee-wee.
Karen, I'm curious - how am I doing so? I am hoping you are not implying that I am a RINO Republican.
I still think I am promoting self-responsibility; if people want to scarf down a Twinkie thinking, "Yah! Screw the liberals and their arugula!", well, go at it, but let's not kid ourselves that we're not doing it really to enjoy the sweet, cream filling.
Actually, poor choice of image - now, a Ding Dong fresh from the freezer - ah!
You are right Digi in not trusting us to be the market drivers. Face it, fritos taste better than tofu. However, as little as I trust us, I trust the government less.
(BTW I eat in my car or fast food about once a week.)
Father, if you trust the government less - as do I - then you have to start being more proactive in being the market driver. And me, too. And anyone else reading this.
BTW - once a month is better. Or at least hit Subway now and then, in lieu of Burger King or McDonald's. Yeah, I know - no drive thrus, but getting out of your car for fifteen minutes will prevent that deep vein thrombosis from setting in.
I say eat all the Fritos you want, because some ass with a gun is gonna shoot you soon anyway :)
Hi Digi. As someone who dedicated over 28 years to state service, I'd like to point out something you may not have considered.
I determined eligibility for public benefits, including Medicaid. CT had passed a mandatory helmet law in the '70s, but it was repealed that same decade. I saw many young men in their twenties apply for Medicaid for themselves because they were involved in an accident. Many of them were disabled for life; some were in a coma. Often they had conservators to handle their affairs. It was very sad.
In addition to being sad, it was very costly to the taxpayer who had to pick up the Medicaid tab for a lifetime of care--read sixty years if the person lived that long. I don't want to see my tax dollars spent on someone who should have worn a helmet. I would rather they live a long and happy life.
I realize that you can mandate helmet laws, but there will always be those who refuse to wear them. Still, those who do will be spared a lifetime of agony, and so will their caretakers.
To anyone reading this who suffered the loss or disability of a loved one because of a motorcycle accident, my sincere sorrow at your loss.
As one who has met Digi, I am inclined to state that she is not a RINO, although she is pretty damn funny.
Post a Comment