NY State Supreme Court judge ices Bloomberg’s #BigGulp ban



A state judge today stopped City Hall from banning New York City restaurants and other venues from selling large sugary drinks — a bubble-bursting defeat for Mayor Bloomberg who has made public health a cornerstone of his tenure.

Before the earth-shaking ruling by New York Supreme Court Judge Milton Tingling, restaurants, movie theaters, sports venues, convenience stores and other places regulated by the city’s health department would have been prohibited — starting tomorrow — from selling sugary drinks of more than 16 ounces.

Tingling permanently stopped the city from enforcing the ban.

“[The city] is enjoined and permanently restrained from implementing or enforcing the new regulations,” New York Supreme Court Judge Milton Tingling ruled.

The judge said Bloomberg and the Board of Health overstepped their bounds, to enforce rules that should be established by the legislative bodies.

“The rule would not only violate the separation of powers doctrine, it would eviscerate it,” Tingling wrote. “Such an evisceration has the potential to be more troubling than sugar sweetened drinks.”


“It is arbitrary and capricious because it applies to some but not all food establishments in the city, it excludes other beverages that have significantly higher concentrations of sugar sweeteners and/or calories on suspect grounds, and the loopholes inherent in the rule, including but not limited to no limitations on refills, defeat and/or serve to gut the purpose of the rule,” Tingling wrote.

The Mayor’s office will, of course, appeal the decision.  Will be interesting to see how far this goes – and ultimately what the outcome will be. In the meantime, those 17-ounce “inspection cups” that “health inspectors” were to be using to make sure restaurants weren’t cheating will remain – for now –  on the shelf.

As they say, stay tuned …

My body, my choice

Ha! Photo via Stan Brooks/1010 WINS, as seen on CBS NY’s website.

Update – 6:18 PM: Tweet of the Day:


Pelosi really does believe that all the money is hers


**Posted by Phineas

All the money! Give it to me! MINE!!!

All the money! Give it to me! MINE!!!

Well, the government’s, but you just know that, deep down inside, she sees herself as synonymous with the government — l’Etat c’est Nancy!

Bryan Preston noted this interesting bit of progressive logic while the Minority Leader was talking about reducing government spending:

“Tax cuts are spending.”

“Our whole budget is what $3.5 trillion,” Pelosi said at a Capitol Hill press conference. “So, when we talk about reducing spending, we certainly must, and we certainly have–$1.6 trillion in the previous Congress, $1.2 of it in the Budget Control Act.

“But spending is also related to tax cuts,” said Pelosi. Tax cuts are spending. Tax expenditures, they are called. Subsidies for big oil, subsidies to send jobs overseas, breaks to send jobs overseas, breaks for corporate jets. They are called tax expenditures. Spending money on tax breaks.

“And that’s the spending that we must curtail as well,” she said.

Preston is right: the only way this logic works, the only way a tax cut can be intellectually considered a government expenditure, is if all money is the government’s in the first place. Then it would make sense: by lowering tax rates, the government spends money it otherwise would have had, by letting the people keep more. It is also the government’s right —superior to that of the people— to decide how the money is expended, because it’s their property, anyway.

And it’s an idea utterly alien to everything this nation was founded on.

As I wrote a couple of months ago, when Pelosi said something similar:

But, cynical me, I suspect that is not what Nancy wants. No, what she wants, like Rocco in “Key Largo,” is more.  More revenue, more of our money. There’s never enough. And she wants the power that comes with having more money to redistribute, to turn citizens into dependent clients of the State and the Democratic Party. She and her progressive brethren will take the money and then control who gets how much — and if they want to keep getting it, they’ll vote the right way.

The power to distribute money is the power to control.

That’s what’s at the heart of the repeated bleatings from progressives about “more revenue.” Forget “fairness,” at least as it’s understood in the real world.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

Babs Walters: Elisabeth Hasselbeck is not leaving “The View”


The veteran TV personality Walters today put the brakes on the reports that Hasselbeck was being kicked off the show at all – much less due to her political views, which are at odds with the rest of the cast:

Barbara Walters refuted reports that Elisabeth Hasselbeck is leaving “The View.”

Early on during Monday’s episode of the talk show, Walters discussed rumors that Hasselbeck was leaving “The View” because of the conservative opinions she often voices.

“There is a particularly false story that keeps getting picked up about Elisabeth’s departure,” Walters said. “We value her and appreciate point of view… She helps keep the show balanced… We have no plans for Elisabeth to leave the show.”

US Weekly was the first to report the longtime co-host would not be returning for the 17th season of the daytime chat show.

They quoted a show insider who said she was being dropped because she was too politically conservative for viewers.

Hasselbeck, 35, joined the show in 2003.

False rumors of her departure came just days after Joy Behar confirmed she would not be returning to the show.

Speaking solely for myself, I’d only ever get remotely close to the View studios if I were being held at gunpoint, but Hasselbeck has made a home for herself there amongst superficial liberal women who only pay her cheap lip service when it comes to being “tolerant” of differing viewpoints, so more power to her for holding her own. Hasselbeck reminds me of conservatives who occasionally appear on shows like Bill Maher’s – they’re there so the hosts can say they provide “all points of view” for you to consider but in reality they keep conservatives around either to try to embarrass, shame them, or hope they embarrass and/or shame themselves. Fortunately, most of the time these conservatives do just the opposite, which is infuriating to ultra-leftists like Maher. I know many conservatives who don’t care for the way Hasselbeck tries to get along with the others on the View by attempting to find “neutral ground” but if you had to work in that highly hostile & volatile environment, there isn’t much different you’d probably do unless you wanted to get yourself kicked to the curb.

I suspect Hasselbeck stays on in an effort to try to impress upon daytime viewers the need for a conservative “alternative” voice when it comes to talking about cultural issues, so in that regard she is “taking one for the team.” Things will probably become a little more pleasant for her once Joy Behar exits stage far left later this year.

Stay strong, Mrs. H.