“Big Gulp” and Food Stamps
I don’t like colas, sodas or soft drinks. There is absolutely no valued nutrition in a carbonated cola drink. I read, I investigate and I learn that this is not something I want to put in my body. But that is my choice…..
As a health care professional, I completely agree that a growing percentage of US citizens are nutritionally inept. 60% of US citizens are classified as overweight with half of these being obese. This epidemic leads to growing increases in the incidence of diabetes, heart disease and poor health outcomes. As a healthcare professional, it would be easy for me to agree that mayors and lawmakers can simply put a restriction on ‘non-healthful’ foods and beverages. It would be a ‘symbolic’ fix to a much deeper issue. But as a conservative woman, I know that human nature doesn’t work like that. Furthermore, it is an insult to intelligence.
Let’s consider the real reasons for Mayor Bloomberg’s latest proposal to reduce or control the sale of oversized carbonated colas in New York. As these are hypothetical, opinion-based suggestions, you are encouraged to ponder on the disease and not the symptom. The disease is government out-of-control over our personal liberties. The symptom is yet another ‘rule or law’ to take focus off of the real problems disguised as an attempt to show compassion! It’s embarrassing to know that this “Big Gulp” idea is actually being discussed!! But as conservatives, we are forced to point out the obvious. Let’s look at two examples that seem to contradict this notion of ‘caring’.
Bloomberg: The mayor and others have made statements in the recent past that suggests that there should never be “mandate” on what a food stamp recipient eats or drinks. Why? Because according to this mindset, that would be discriminating and “gulp”, maybe even racist. Isn’t ‘health’ the reason for this latest outreach? Is her saying he does not care about the health of the poor? I’m confused!
Conservative: Since taxpayers foot the bill for the ever-growing dependency on food stamp programs, then why not have voters take this issue to the polls in their states? Since we know that taxpayers also foot the bill for health care costs of many long standing entitlement programs, shouldn’t we be able to say what items are on the “No No” list? Such examples of current allowable items are: “soft drinks (really?), candy, cookies, snack crackers and ice cream” www.fns.usda.gov/snap/retailers/eligibility.htm. Other eligible items include: seafood, steak and bakery. Shouldn’t items, such as broccoli, fresh fruit, nuts, whole grain breads be promoted on the “allowable” list?
So why is Mayor Bloomberg now so concerned about the health of all others? Is it possible the soft drink industry has fallen short on political lobbying and / or donations? Is it possible he is trying to take the focus off of the real problems in our current political climate, ie: economy? Ask yourself, why? Why colas?
Bloomberg: Allowed this atrocious behavior to flourish in downtown Manhattan. He demonstrated little, if any regard for local businesses and law abiding citizens’ rights. Why was he OK with this? Is he trying to put businesses out on the street? Does he promote this type of behavior with his own family? Does he believe that lazy, non-working complainers are the best he can attract?
Conservative: If you or I were to run wildly through the town, take off our clothes, defecate on cars, stab police, witness rapes, etc. then we would be subject to serious legal consequences.
Why? Why is Mayor Bloomberg afraid of the Occupiers? Is he interested in ‘bullying’ the law abiding businesses and restaurants because he knows he will be met with little resistance? Is this a backdoor way of intimidating the regular folk? Is he trying to get political donations? What is it? I still am confused!
I’m sitting and writing this because I simply cannot believe that our “Land of the Free” has permitted this type of leadership in this country. I’m embarrassed for the people who actually listen and promote these concepts. This has nothing to do with NY mayor’s desire to make people healthier. If it were, he would have endorsed restrictions on food stamp menus. If it were, he would have empowered individuals to think about the choices they make in their meal and beverage planning, not propose mandates. If he was a true and caring leader, he might choose to demonstrate his views through personal editorials, communications or social media pages. He might even have tried to ‘empower’ restaurants by holding a ‘friendly’ competition to show what restaurants come up with the healthiest alternative to sodas. Not only would this be fun, but it could promote community togetherness and increase revenues for the city.
With all the problems this nation is facing, it is important for us to dig deeper for the real meanings behind these proposed absurdities from elected officials. Soft drinks are certainly not a health food, however there are a definitely worse items being ingested in today’s society: drugs, mindless and meaningless Hollywood music and reality shows, domestic violence, rape, murders, disorderly conduct, government subsidized food programs, excess alcohol, poor school outcomes, high gas prices, unemployment, to name a few….I wonder if that is the real reason why politicians focus on issues such as ‘Big Gulp’ soda pop concerns while simultaneously cannot “man up” to the serious problems. Why did we ever let it get to this point? These officials are supposed to work for us, not the other way around! It’s time to question motives. It’s time to make our government leaders take a “big gulp” of our reality!