Couric Bubbly Over Soda Tax, Fails to Consider Idea Obnoxious to Average Americans

Couric Bubbly Over Soda Tax, Fails to Consider Idea Obnoxious to Average Americans

By Ken Shepherd (Bio | Archive)
September 22, 2009 - 10:31 ET

"It's the most explosive moment for the soda industry since the Diet Coke and Mentos experiment," CBS's Katie Couric quipped of a proposed federal soda tax in her September 18 Notebook video on CBSNews.com (embedded at right).

While careful not to explicitly endorse a proposed one-cent-per-ounce tax on sugary drinks, Couric hinted that taxing sodas could help curb obesity, because, after all, "some lawmakers say taxes on cigarettes have reduced smoking and raised revenues."

Pledging to help soda-drinking Americans lose weight while simultaneously thinning their wallets -- and fattening Uncle Sam's coffers -- certainly appeals to the self-appointed food police and tax-hiking liberals, but it's likely to cause average Americans to gripe about having to pay taxes for the harmless guilty pleasure of cracking open an ice-cold soda pop.

Yet Couric sees only a downside to that dastardly profitable soft drink industry, not average Americans tired of government intrusion into their personal choices:

It may also be a way to combat obesity. UCLA researchers found that people who drink soda are 27 times more likely to be overweight. A regular, daily soda drinker can consume - get this - 39 pounds of sugar a year just from those drinks. Gulp!

President Obama thinks the tax is an idea worth exploring, and some lawmakers say taxes on cigarettes have reduced smoking and raised revenues.

Without a doubt, the idea is bubbling up in Washington and it could soon give soda companies some major gas pains.

That's a page from my notebook.

—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Has Anyone Read This Bill?

September 22, 2009 - 10:37 ET by JustAl

I've been told it also contains a 900% tax on ammunition as a veiled attack on the 2nd amendment. Can anyone confirm this?

Thanks,

LOL

September 22, 2009 - 11:09 ET by StarAZ

Who reads bills? So passe.

Is CBS Going Under

September 22, 2009 - 11:39 ET by allanf

Well Katie Couric may be captain of the Titanic according to Yahoo Finance.

How About Taxing Coffee and Tea, Too?

September 22, 2009 - 10:43 ET by BondPlainBond

Sugar is added to both of these beverages by more than half the American populace.

If Obama is going to tax "sugary drinks", coffee and tea certainly fit into that category.

Just because they're sold sans sugar (sometimes; bottled coffees and teas do contain sugar) to begin with, doesn't mean sugar (teaspoonsful) don't end up in them deliberately.

Coffee

September 22, 2009 - 10:44 ET by saw the light

Now them's fightin' words!

Good example. If that happens, I guess I'll use my wife's Splenda!

"I think that when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." Barack Obama to "Joe the Plumber"

I Don't Think It Will Happen

September 22, 2009 - 11:35 ET by BondPlainBond

I live in California and we're being deluged with commercials from a group in Washington State and their VERY negative feelings about this "beverage tax". Not too many people are happy about the continued rape of our wallets by the Obama Administration, anyway, but this is over the top.

Other Taxes Katie May Like

September 22, 2009 - 14:43 ET by allanf

So if its not "healthy" tax it. So we can tax:

Liquor and Beer
Cakes
Fruits (lot's of sugar)
Chips
Breads (lot's of complex carbohydrates)
Red Meat - (leads to heart attacks)
Bottled Water and other Bottled Drinks (its those evil bottles)
Milk -- (oh that cholesterol)
Ice Cream
Butter

We could go on and on and on. But leftists, who exploit high minded buffoons will do it for us.

don't forget bacon

September 22, 2009 - 15:43 ET by katainkent

mmm bacon.

____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes

Or, better yet, the

September 22, 2009 - 10:47 ET by fitzfong

Or, better yet, the thieving rats in government can simply keep their disease-infested paws off OUR MONEY and we can resume drinking whatever the hell we want to without giving President Alinksy and company a handout.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

fitzfong

September 22, 2009 - 11:32 ET by BondPlainBond

That's the spirit!

I say tax the news.

September 22, 2009 - 14:31 ET by mattm

I say tax the news.

Well this is typical of

September 22, 2009 - 10:43 ET by fitzfong

Well this is typical of what passes for "thinking" with the bimbo liability that is Katie Couric. I guess when you're paid $15 million a year to deliver last place ratings, you fail to grasp the concept that permitting the government to seize more money to throw down the union/illegal alien/socialist "medicine" black hole from the taxing of a product that people WANT, means that people can afford less of what they WANT...meaning blue collar workers who have steady jobs in bottling plants, transportation, etc. might not have such steady jobs in the future even though natural demand for what they have to sell is still very high. Meanwhile, this slut continues STEALING money producing content that nobody wants. Unbelievable.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

WE

September 22, 2009 - 10:59 ET by jessieH

WE are already taxed on soda. We are taxed on everythink, including our pets. I don't think it's legal to tax the people twice for the same thing. I'll just switch to tea. The soda companies will move to a place with no tax. There go more jobs. Couric is an idiot.

Soda doesn't make people fat, people do

September 22, 2009 - 11:09 ET by zostay

Yes, this is a wonderful idea. I have a friend whose daughter has a rare disorder that prevents her from digesting proteins properly. In order for her body to manufacture enough proteins to survive, she has to consume around 1500 calories a day (she's 3 years old). Soda is, therefore, a diet supplement for her.

Taxing this while he's already dealing with part time layoffs is a great way to help him and his family. One size fits all solutions are dumb. And social engineering by taxation is among the stupidest things humans have come up with.

As they keep telling us, we

September 22, 2009 - 11:12 ET by motherbelt

As they keep telling us, we are all too stupid to know what's good for us.

Yes, the newest culprit is BIG COLA!!

That stupid polar bear is just another Joe Camel!!

Pass the duct tape, Duchess

September 22, 2009 - 11:20 ET by Blonde

Because my head is going to explode.

The government already taxes everything (and already taxes soda, via Sales Tax)....my property, the energy I use, the garbage and water servuce, phone and internet, alcohol, tobacco, and every non-produce/meat item of food, the clothes, appliances, and miscellaneous items I buy.

I suppose it would be easier to type a list of the things that are not taxed....yet here is Katie Cupcake bubbling over about yet another tax.

Democrats. ***sound of tape unwinding****

I hope he fails, too.

Hey, B... You have enough

September 22, 2009 - 11:33 ET by motherbelt

Hey, B... You have enough to last a couple of days???

I'll ship more from the Space Coast in a few days when I'm down there!!

Thank you, Highness

September 22, 2009 - 11:38 ET by Blonde

I have a bit of a spare supply after your last shipment of duct tape in rainbow colors, mucho gracias.

And an early welcome to the Sunshine State. The weather is beginning to turn a bit, not quite so sweltering, so your visit should be fabulous.

I hope he fails, too.

I like the idea of a 'soda'

September 22, 2009 - 11:16 ET by 24enak

I like the idea of a 'soda' tax and I drink about 4 cans a day. I love the idea of cigarette taxes, because either smokers will pay the taxes no matter how high the taxes are or they quit smoking. To me it is a win win.

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/227615/may-13-2009/stephen-s-coke-party-protest

Win-win?

September 22, 2009 - 11:32 ET by JustAl

. . . maybe, if you think government contol is better than personal responsability, I suppose.

And if they quit smoking,

September 22, 2009 - 11:35 ET by motherbelt

And if they quit smoking, you can expect to make up for the taxes that the government will lose there.....but you don't mind paying taxes, so I guess it stays a win-win for you!

ANOTHER soda tax, you mean

September 22, 2009 - 11:45 ET by CobraMan

You already pay taxes on that can of soda, several taxes, as a matter of fact. Every tax imaginable is included in the price of that soda, from Corporate taxes to transportation taxes, to fuel taxes, to energy taxes, to well, every tax imaginable, including income taxes on the people who make that soda, the people who deliver that soda, the people who sell that soda, and even the people who BUY that soda. How much more taxes are you willing to pay?

Here's an idea, instead of raising costs for everyone else (with you LOVE for guilty pleasure taxes) who don't you just send the federal government an equal amount of cash, for deposit in the general fund of course, for every can of soda you buy. That way YOU don't have to feel guilty for you purchases as WE don't have to pay to ease your guilt through yet another tax.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

Hey 24enak, I love the

September 22, 2009 - 11:55 ET by mastersofdeceit

Hey 24enak,

I love the idea of all people who want to regulate ( The county today might snuff out smoking at its parks and beaches.) and tax smokers can NEVER use a product or invention that was developed by a smoker. Deal?

(h/t Joe Strummer)

That's because you're a

September 22, 2009 - 14:04 ET by fitzfong

That's because you're a moron. It's not the government's responsibility nor right to determine (through punitive "sin" taxes or otherwise), what we can drink and what we cannot drink. The only entities that "win" in your phony "win-win" scenario are the irresponsible, bloated, parasitic government and the black hole programs and trial lawyers it funnels our money to as a result.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

Hell, Couric doesn't even

September 22, 2009 - 11:18 ET by HockeyKid

Hell, Couric doesn't even write her own "Notebook" entries. At least, that's what the network claimed when she go caught plagiarizing an article on libraries. Remember that?

As for taxes, it's clear that whoever DID write the entry knew as little about them as The Perky One herself. Imagine--let's tax a behavior to both discourage it AND increase revenues. Good luck with that.

"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me

If I want to kill myself on

September 22, 2009 - 11:22 ET by Airforce_5_O

Dr. Pepper and Snickers Bars it is none of your business Katie (tee hee). I can think of worst fates like jumping into a wood chipper or being taxed to death.

Liberalism: The haunting feeling that someone, somewhere, can help themselves.

Couric pushing soda tax

September 22, 2009 - 11:23 ET by grumpyoldb

What else would you expect from one of the main propaganda arms of the Obama White House? These people are NOT journalists, they merely spout what the government wants them to spout. Check your integrety levels Katie... and take a look at every single government that has used the press they way you are being used. NO good comes from a compliant press that just lays down and does what they are told....

I agree that such 'vice'

September 22, 2009 - 11:27 ET by JasonC

I agree that such 'vice' taxes are a terrible idea and go against very basic concepts of the right to exert one's free will (even if it's self-destructive) and the right to consumer choice.

However, it's worth noting that governmental attempts such as this are a natural extension of the drug war, and so long as the populace continues to passively accept its government spending billions of dollars on agencies like the DEA to restrict freedom of personal choice in other areas of harmful consumption, that gov't has no real reason to believe it can't extend such restrictions to things like soda.

That said, I'm going to pour a Coke over ice and have lunch.

Yet another tax? How typical!

September 22, 2009 - 11:37 ET by CobraMan

Yet another tax? How will raising taxes going to combat obesity? Taxes have been raising on "fatty" foods for decades now, yet the "obesity rate" keep climbing, correct? So how is yet another tax going to succeed where all others have failed?

There's only one proven, reliable method for reducing obesity, and that's strenuous exercise. Why don't the liberals offer a exercise tax credit? You know, like a credit for your US Swim and Fitness membership or something like that? We can call it the Bally Health Credit.

If the liberals are really serious about the general health of Americans, then they should REWARD people for performing healthy, strenuous activities, not PUNISHING them for drinking or eating something the liberals find unacceptable. Of course, this has nothing to do with the health and well-being of Americas and everything to do with the health and well-being of ever-increasing tax revenue.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

all fruit drinks have sugar content-

September 22, 2009 - 11:43 ET by JIMMY1660

so we will stop raising oranges/grapefriut and close all bottling plants.

sounds good you ignorant slut.

BHO- THE PROGRESSIVE PIRATE

Katie Cupcake

September 22, 2009 - 11:43 ET by katainkent

lets tax plastic surgery, botox and other aging female glam-type products. Then crack a smile for us.

Did anyone see that the head of Coca-Cola (Muhtar Kent) hit back?

“I have never seen it work where a government tells people what to eat and what to drink,” Kent said today, responding to an audience question at the Rotary Club of Atlanta. “If it worked, the Soviet Union would still be around.

How true! The government gets to liking this revenue and people's consumption goes down and suddenly their pockets are less full than when they started so they have to seek something else to tax. People are going to eventually push back. The cigarette tax was a major smack to lower income people. Here's another one. Much as they'd try - you can't tax and legislate your way to a healthier country. If that were so, Britian would be one of the healthiest nations in the world.

____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes

Bubble Tax

September 22, 2009 - 11:48 ET by Pilgrim1949

Perhaps The One's minions can levy a tax on little Miss Bubbly's bubble-headedness.

Now there's an endless source of revenue!

If there was vapidness tax she'd be suddenly broke and owing countless sums to the bottomless coffers of Big Government.

Typical Lib approach, though. Tax the bejezuss out of something (the proceeds of which will go to a NOBLE cause...) until *voila!* the taxed activity (sooprize, sooprize!) suddenly ceases to exist. "Oh me, oh my, golly gee, now what else can we tax to make up for the shortfall in this NOBLE project?"

(B)Lather, rinse, repeat.

"Ye canne change the laws of physics....." but some politicians believe that with the right legislation you can pretend they don't really apply to your own pet projects...

Dumb b...

September 22, 2009 - 11:50 ET by Thinking.Man

Do they have a high IQ limit, like 80 or something? None of these people can think

1. Tax Tax Tax

2. People cut back (the intention)

3. Layoff's at the soad factory

4. More people out of work

OBAMA, OBAMA you are the savior... sheesh, it seems like leftist breed dumber every generation, it's like reverse evolution.

Hey can you guess the C in her name relly stands for?

Contrary to what the author

September 22, 2009 - 12:20 ET by JesseJacksonIV

Contrary to what the author wrote, sodas are hardly a harmless guilty pleasure. The sugar, artifical flavor, color, preservatives that are in those sodas can't be good for us.

If a tax is the only way to stop people from drinking that junk, then so be it.

you always seem

September 22, 2009 - 12:28 ET by katainkent

to pop your head in here for the soda tax threads. Why is that?

____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes

I don't see a tax on soda

September 22, 2009 - 12:58 ET by JesseJacksonIV

I don't see a tax on soda has being bad. It looks the only way to get people to stop drinking all of that sugar. Despite all the info people have about how bad sugar and the other junk that is in those drinks is for us, people still drink them.

so...

September 22, 2009 - 13:07 ET by katainkent

you're an opponent of free will?

____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes

Excuse me

September 22, 2009 - 13:11 ET by Blonde

But what on earth makes you think you (or anyone else for that matter) are entitled to decide what I or anyone else other than you and your family eat, drink, smoke (or not smoke), watch, read, etc.?

Just where the hell do you get off?

As an American, I have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and you and your hapless leader, Obama, have no right whatsoever to infringe on my right(s).

Bugger off with your Big Brother BS.

I hope he fails, too.

So the government wanting

September 22, 2009 - 13:18 ET by JesseJacksonIV

So the government wanting us to be healthier is bad? So I guess your against product recalls then? If car is prone to explode then government should leave it on the market, right? Hey buy this car, it may explode and kill you, but so what this is America we can't tell you what to do.

Hope you like you and your family being exposed to second hand smoke, dangerous food additives, exploding cars

ha

September 22, 2009 - 13:25 ET by katainkent

that's very funny. You're comparing hidden faulty workmanship with choices to consume well documented food realities. Ie. If you eat too much you gain WEIGHT. If you consume too much sugar you gain WEIGHT. That is free choice. What you're advocating is fraud and endangerment.

Well, we're having Garlic Potato Soup tonight for dinner with WHITE sourdough bread. The soup has a rediculous amount of butter(SATURATED FAT & TRANSFAT), whole cream(FAT), bacon(FAT & NITRATES) and ham(NITRATES) in it.

You're welcome to drop by. :)

____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes

kata

September 22, 2009 - 13:28 ET by Blonde

Where's my invite?

Since I couldn't possibly join you, due to the lateness of the invitation (not to mention the miles involved).....could you at least send me the recipe? Sounds delish!

I hope he fails, too.

sowwy :(

September 22, 2009 - 13:47 ET by katainkent

sent you the recipe, though. I recommend it served in bread bowls with grated cheddar (omg more fat) and green onions ;)

So Typical, JJIV

September 22, 2009 - 13:25 ET by Blonde

I ask you a question and you dodge and parry with a hypothetical and putting words in my mouth. Silly Talking Points are all you can come up with?

Answer my question.

The government is NOT my brother, nor my keeper. Nor are you.

I hope he fails, too.

JesseJacksonIV, So what

September 22, 2009 - 13:43 ET by hydrodynDM

JesseJacksonIV,

So what you're saying is that if there weren't compulsory recalls for things like exploding cars, the companies wouldn't bother with them?

Yea, that makes sense. Given the choice between buying a car from a company with a history of producing safe cars and one that doesn't, I'm sure I would go with the latter. As I'm sure most potential care buyers would.

Great argument, Einstein.

What part of "IT'S NOT THE

September 22, 2009 - 14:23 ET by fitzfong

What part of "IT'S NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S BUSINESS" do you not understand?

By the way, as usual, you present very weak talking points and straw man "arguments". A truly free market regulates itself whereby if a car is prone to explode, word tends to get around and self-interested auto manufacturers will eagerly fix the defect(s) to protect the consumers (and, by extension, themselves). Same thing goes for defective products. As for the "2nd hand smoke" myth, this is simply a device used by non-smokers who just don't like to be around cigarette smoke but who need a made-up medical condition to enforce their intolerant wishes on others without addressing their frivolous motivations.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

fitz

September 22, 2009 - 14:28 ET by Blonde

Tiresome talking points, straw men, and moral equivalency. Typical day in liberal land.

I just got back from three whole weeks of blessed quiet and lack of liberals (well, except for one who parked herself at our breakfast table)....and I must say, I'm doing everything humanly possible to get myself back into that state (or should I say nation?).

Costa Rica rocks.

I hope he fails, too.

Blonde, I hear you.

September 22, 2009 - 14:52 ET by fitzfong

Blonde, I hear you. Unfortunately we have a lot of JJIV's these days who far from simply parking themselves at the breakfast table one morning, will make themselves permanent fixtures at said table, eat all our food (paying for nothing) and then demand we thank them for consuming our breakfast each day for our "own good".

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

Second Hand Smoke BS

September 22, 2009 - 17:16 ET by ScottyDog

Just for the record, the two health organizations that spent millions of our tax dollars to do the research found that there was no link to any illness as a result of second hand tobacco smoke. The CDC and the European WHO found no significant risk to non smokers from second hand smoke in its 26 year long term study on second hand smoke.

"The world's leading health organisation has withheld from publication a study
which shows that not only might there be no link between passive smoking and
lung cancer but that it could even have a protective effect."

That also includes the so called asthma suffers that loudly complain about their asthma being kicked up after smelling tobacco smoke. No scientific evidence says the WHO report.

The report from the CDC initially was available on its website but they took it down. Rush Limbaugh has both reports in his archives. Here is an except from the WHO study:

"It confirms what we and many other scientists have long believed, that while
smoking in public may be annoying to some non-smokers, the science does not show
that being around a smoker is a lung-cancer risk."

Just like with Global Warming if you repeat something often enough people will begin to believe anything. Joseph Goebbels was well aware of this tactic that is why the Germans used this in their propaganda campaigns.

No, it's not bad

September 22, 2009 - 17:26 ET by Sonia H

But TAXING the people to get there IS bad. It's not about 'making us healthy', it's about controlling every aspect of our lives

Sonia in Las Vegas

JJIV, Yeah, ain't freedom a real b*tch.

September 22, 2009 - 13:23 ET by R D Helm

I own me, not the government.

If you want to be owned by the government, move to Cuba.

-Dave

I agree with Rush. It's time for Obama to resign.

OK, if it's all about free

September 22, 2009 - 14:05 ET by JesseJacksonIV

OK, if it's all about free will. Then everyone should be allowed to marry whoever they want and a woman, if she wants to, can get an abortion.

Conservatives will go along with that right? Or is free will only for certain things?

uh huh...

September 22, 2009 - 14:14 ET by katainkent

what of the will of the unborn child? I personally could care less who marrys whom (or what) as long as they aren't endangering a child.

____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes

Most conservatives seem to

September 22, 2009 - 14:20 ET by JesseJacksonIV

Most conservatives seem to care who marries whom. But when it comes to that free will goes out the window apparantly. Guess free will only applies to eating, drinking, smoking

most?

September 22, 2009 - 14:27 ET by katainkent

I have no idea if its 'most'. But you're losing this argument and flailing terribly if you're trying to drag people into a same sex marriage and/or abortion debate.

____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes

"Most conservatives seem

September 22, 2009 - 17:32 ET by Sonia H

"Most conservatives seem to..."

A generalization about conservatives and not a very good one.

Sonia in Las Vegas

This is where things get

September 22, 2009 - 17:39 ET by JasonC

This is where things get thorny. People on both sides of the aisle will claim that issues like this come down to free will/market absolutism, but of course, it almost always has an element of ideological relativism. Cigarettes and soda, for instance, have already been aligned with Regular Americans/the working class in this message board. Thus, overtaxing them can be viewed as elitist. You are absolutely correct that the basis of these posters' arguments would appear to be applicable to the exculpation of abortion and other non-conservative-approved activities. I implied hours ago that such overtaxing, insofar as it can be perceived as one step toward outright banning, is the natural consequence of our placid acceptance of such outrageous campaigns against free will/personal responsibility as the drug war. No response there, however. This goes to show that it is the particularity of the item in question, not the sweeping rhetoric of free will, that is at stake here.

And, JJIV, while I disagree with you that these taxes are a good idea, I do find it puzzling that some posters responded as though you had advocated an outright ban rather than a tax.

jason

September 22, 2009 - 18:01 ET by katainkent

everyone has a vice. How much tax would have to be added to that vice to get you cut down? How about quit?

____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes

Depends on a lot of

September 22, 2009 - 18:59 ET by JasonC

Depends on a lot of things. But you did see that I wrote to JJIV I disagree with you that these taxes are a good idea, right?

yup I read that

September 22, 2009 - 19:13 ET by katainkent

but you wondered why people reacted as if there had been a ban. I was posing you a thoughtful question.

____________________________________________
The Emperor, he has no clothes

I wondered why people were

September 22, 2009 - 22:36 ET by JasonC

I wondered why people were acting as though JJIV had advocated a ban. To me, being taxed on something is not comparable to having to go through black market channels to obtain that thing. Which is why I have to chuckle when cigarette smokers complain about high prices; at least they can buy their drug of choice at any corner store in America without worrying about being tackled by a DEA agent. That's why I don't find the two concepts all that similar.

Gosh

September 22, 2009 - 14:21 ET by Blonde

Last time I checked, abortion was legal in this country. Although I am pro-life, I have to acknowledge that fact. But I don't have to pay for anyone else to murder an unborn child.

Secondly, everyone is perfectly able to marry whomever they wish, however same-sex marriages are not condoned by the state. That doesn't mean they can't occur, just that they aren't recognized.

Care to try again? Because you are on a stellar losing streak, here.

I hope he fails, too.

Misdirection and irrelevant

September 22, 2009 - 14:41 ET by fitzfong

Misdirection and irrelevant non-sequiturs. That's the best you've got? Unlike Marxist trolls like yourself, we conservatives tend to like freedom and individual rights. Do what you want as long as you pay for it. I stay out of your business, you stay the hell out of mine. But it doesn't quite work that way. Not content to have abortion as a right, your crowd insists on making those of us who object to the practice SUBSIDIZE IT. I know you're trying to cloak gay marriage in the euphemism "marry whoever they want", but that's a dead end. I'm a conservative with no objection to gay marriage. That said, explain "marry whoever they want". Is it OK in your book for an adult to marry a child because he wants to? Is it all right for JesseJacksonIV to marry a goat because he wants to? If you're using the expression "marry whoever they want" simply to imply gay marriage, you best hang your hat on a different expression.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

free will sounds great

September 22, 2009 - 14:43 ET by candance

While we're at it, let's let unscrupulous business owners buy babies into slavery (that was framed as a free choice issue in the 1860s), let waitresses "choose" which tables get fast service based on skin color, let managers choose to only hire straight white males, and let doctors choose whom their clients will be.

Wait, we're not allowed to make those choices?

Then maybe Christians resist gay marriage because they're afraid of losing their right to choose.

Gays want their agenda to be cast as the new civil rights movement, despite the fact that it would give the government power to legislate religious activity. Wait, the government regulating what pastors can and cannot do - that sounds like a violation of church and state!

And before you claim that civil rights stopped pastors from discriminating against minorities, do keep in mind that evangelicals funded abolition in the 1850s and it was Republican evangelicals who marched with Dr. King. We've never had a problem policing our own from bigotry.

I See

September 22, 2009 - 15:56 ET by JustAl

. . . so, by your way of thinking taxing soda will make people stop drinking soda. Therefore, taxing success via inordinately high income taxes on top wage earners will convience them to quit trying so hard and join the herd.

Got it.

Oh, the "sin" tax subject

September 22, 2009 - 14:10 ET by fitzfong

Oh, the "sin" tax subject is on the table again. Time for the inglorious return of NewsBusters' biggest, dumbest and most obnoxious Marxist parasite, JesseJacksonIV. IT'S NONE OF YOUR F******* BUSINESS WHAT OTHER PEOPLE DRINK. PERIOD. Now crawl back in your hole.

"I spent a lot of money on booze, birds and fast cars. The rest I just squandered." -George Best

If the goal is to fight

September 22, 2009 - 12:27 ET by Reaver

If the goal is to fight obesity, why not stop subsidizing sugar beet production? Or corn production since most “sugar” nowadays is really high fructose corn syrup? That would have the desired affect of raising the cost of sweet food and drink. Of course this would be a political non-starter because of the strong farm lobby. More to the point the goal is the tax, not the high minded causes used to justify the tax.

I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me. - Hunter S. Thompson

Bubbly tax.. while we're at it, how about..

September 22, 2009 - 12:47 ET by Gary Hall

If this is all about fat and fat people, then let's get real and go for the gusto here.

Let's tax butter, bread, tamales, mashed potatoes, fried chicken, hamburgers, onion rings, and Kolbe beef...Hmm.. rich elitist folks...

Come to think of it, let's combine the fat tax with a luxury tax - yep, let's be progressive here. A Hollywood tax!

How about a big double tax (fat and luxury) on expensive cuts of beef, on lobster and on caviar. How's that for progressive - you elitist fools?

And come to think about it... let's slap the tax on the real bubbly here - champagne . Next time that Obama travels to Montana for one of his staged town hall meetings, and they party the night before on flown-in lobster, Kolbe beef (dissing the local farmer's grass fed beef), caviar and champagne, not only will they have to pay the "carbon-tax" on having it flown in, they can pay the fat and luxury taxes as well.

And, just why didn't Katie think of this?

(;~/ gary

Gary....Leave my tamales alone!

September 22, 2009 - 16:11 ET by Blonde

And all the rest of it, come to think of it.

I love everything on your list except Kobe beef. Or Waygu. I've never tried it, and probably never will. Good old regular Costco tenderloin is just fine, thank you very much.

P.S. You forgot Cajun martinis, :)

I hope he fails, too.

Blonde..

September 22, 2009 - 16:45 ET by Gary Hall

Yea, about once a month I pick up a dozen tamales up for the weeks consumption. I perfer a strip to tenderloin, although I remember a particularly exceptional filet down in the keys - in the 70's.

Of course, you know that I tease on the taxes; however, if the elitist media wants taxes on food - then they should go after their own vices - not average folks.

..and ..it all goes well with a Cajun martini!! (;'~>

Doesn't everything?

September 22, 2009 - 16:55 ET by Blonde

Go well w/Cajun martinis?

I can't find decent tamales in South Florida....so golly gee, I just had to learn how to make them myself. It's a PITA....takes about 3 days to do all by myself. I use banana leafs instead of corn husks for wrappers (much easier, not to mention easier to find, they're in my back yard), but my oh my, it is soooo worth the effort. Red sauce is easy peasy....20 New Mexico reds, rehydrated and blended....then cooked a bit, add some chicken stock to get the right consistency, and voila!

I think we should tax the Obama's on their outrageous menu items. Personally responsible for the cost, as well as an added, oh, say, 75% for the insult of buying things at three - twenty times the cost as the rest of us.

I hope he fails, too.

Pardon, Blonde ~

September 22, 2009 - 17:45 ET by BO STINKS

What is a cajun martini? I love dirty martinis and would be interested in a new recipe???

"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!" Sam Adams

I'm going to guess that it

September 22, 2009 - 17:51 ET by JasonC

I'm going to guess that it involves cayenne and a prawn garnish. And must be personally shaken by Mr. James Carville.

Close but no cigar, Jason

September 22, 2009 - 17:54 ET by Blonde

Prawn garnish? Hmmm.

Definite no on Skeletor, tho.

I hope he fails, too.

shaken

September 22, 2009 - 18:04 ET by MrShy

not stirred...

Bo....

September 22, 2009 - 17:52 ET by Blonde

Slice a couple (2 -3) of jalepeno's and drop them in your vodka...less is more as far as time is concerned. Check after about 4 hours. My first batch was undrinkable after a day. Remove the peppers, and strain out the seeds.

Anyhoo.....now you have pepper flavored vodka (or you can buy it, but what's the fun of that?), make a martini as usual...garnish w/a pickled jalepeno, or the real deal if you dare!

Yummy. The degree of hot is up to you...but taste your vodka often (that's fun, too) as you make it. Oh, and use a good vodka, but no need to go over the top with Ketel, Grey Goose, etc.

Let me know how you make out!

I hope he fails, too.

Thanks, Blonde!

September 22, 2009 - 17:56 ET by BO STINKS

Will try soon and let you know. Hubby will want to try too - he loves the hot stuff. He eats habaneros with his sandwich, etc. as if they were banana peppers!

"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!" Sam Adams

Cheers Bo...a votre sante!

September 22, 2009 - 17:59 ET by Blonde

I kind of like Jason's idea of a shrimp. Of course, the "go withs" are entirely up to you.

I am wimpish about to try cooking with habaneros, but I'm loving hot peppers more and more (my stomach disagrees...who cares?).

I hope he fails, too.

Abudanze (sp?), Blonde!

September 22, 2009 - 18:07 ET by BO STINKS

Shrimp, does sound good as a garnish. Thanks, Jason.

Hubby once left a habanero in fridge on a shelf by itself. This was back in the late 80's and I hadn't seen a habanero at that time. I thought, h-m-m-m that looks like it would go well with my lunch. Holy moley!!! Took one tiny bite and then gulped two glasses of milk (I hate milk!). Hubby was properly ashamed for not telling me what the pepper was. :-)

"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!" Sam Adams

Habaneros

September 22, 2009 - 18:12 ET by Blonde

I'm a little skittish about them, for good reason.

Look up Half Moon Bay Trading company on the intertubes. Order your hubby some "Iguana Gold" (there are many other fab hot sauces, Mean Green is not so hot, but yummy). We buy the stuff in the big bottles. Oh, and the Bloody Mary mix is to die for. I've been ordering the stuff for years, it rocks.....and, it's made in Costa Rica, about 50 miles from my (oh how I hope) new home town.

I hope he fails, too.

Half Moon Bay Trading Co., got it!

September 22, 2009 - 18:21 ET by BO STINKS

Will do... All sound good. We retire in nine yrs. and are thinking of Panama. Will hope for your Costa Rica adventure.

Any thoughts on Panama?

"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!" Sam Adams

Panama

September 22, 2009 - 18:29 ET by Blonde

I'll let you know next year...we're planning on driving down to CR early next year, tourist visa is only good for 90 days so shall have to do a side trip. I hear there are fabulous islands on the Atlantic side. We went all the way down to Playa Uva in CR (almost to the Panamanian border on the Atlantic)....beautiful, but hot, and it seemed to be kind of a druggie/ new age tourista town, made up of San Fran trust fund rejects (lots of hair braiding and aroma therapy huts, LOL).

I also want to visit the Pacific side in Panama, the sports fishing is supposed to be HOT, HOT, HOT....but it is also $$$$$. So we shall see.

As for Costa Rica....I think everyone should go there. It is the most amazingly beautiful place, relatively safe (although never leave anything in your car, ever)....and the people are super friendly. It's a 4 - 5 hour drive (or less) from the capitol San Jose to anywhere. There are 27 different ecosystems there, rain forest, cloud forest, dry tropics, desert....the roads are fine, (1 lane mostly, slow, naturally when you are behind trucks)....when you get off the beaten path a 4x4 is fine. I can't emphasize how friendly and helpful the Tico's are. And it's not the typical "hand-out" friendliness, either.

Anyway, enough. I'll get my CR website going one of these years for you guys.

I hope he fails, too.

Thanks, Blonde.

September 22, 2009 - 18:36 ET by BO STINKS

In either 2010 or 2011 we are going to visit Panama for a month. Maybe we can check out CR too. Looking forward to your website.

"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!" Sam Adams

I love cooking with

September 22, 2009 - 18:13 ET by JasonC

I love cooking with habaneros...the trick is to dice them really really finely and add them to the pan really early (like when you add the garlic) so it's simmering in the oil, butter, fat, etc. That way it's thoroughly cooked, you don't get any big chunks in any one bite, and most of the heat dissolves into the cooking medium.

FYI, after dicing a habanero is not the time to remove contact lenses. Sounds obvious, but I learned the hard way.

Thanks for the recipe Blonde, I love doing infusions.

I guess we're speaking again, Jason

September 22, 2009 - 18:21 ET by Blonde

My little sister once rubbed her eyes after touching one of those "ornamental peppers" (so hot they're unfit for human consumption)....it was an emergency room episode. I'd imagine habenero in the eye is much the same....my sympathies.

As for the pepper vodka....taste your jalepenos (I'm sure you know the hot factor or whatever they call it varies widely), and judge accordingly. Goes without saying that when you get it the way you like it, stick it in the freezer, cold and hot at the same time is divine.

Thanks for the advice about habaneros...I've been working on my Mexican, but I think it's about time to master Carribean hot. Oh...and check out the Iguana Gold as I posted to Bo. That stuff rocks. I mix it half and half with mustard and put it on everything, sausages, burgers, etc.

P.S. Time for Octoberfest.

I hope he fails, too.

Thanks, Jason.

September 22, 2009 - 18:24 ET by BO STINKS

Sounds like a good fit in my chili. Am always looking for something fun to add. Grown kids come over on Bronco Sundays and demand chili and corn bread.

Understand about lens.' Brother-in-law made the mistake of rubbing his eyes after handling the habaneros. He had to go to the ER. Needless to say, he never did that again. Hard lesson to learn.

"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!" Sam Adams

You think that's bad

September 22, 2009 - 22:33 ET by RESTLESS 1

Try taking a whiz after slicing them babies. YYYYYEEEEEOOOOWWWWW!!!!!!

Still bring tears to my eyes. :/

"If the man, with the power, can't keep it under control...some heads are gonna roll." -Judas Priest

Gee, Blondie - wonder where ya got that?

September 22, 2009 - 22:14 ET by Gary Hall

hee hee!

Garnish with a few jalepeno stuffed olives - that was the recipie the first time round. And, Bo -- after it's ripe, you can store it in the freezer.

And of course, drink responsibly - unless you've just watched an Obama speech - and then - oh what the heck!

(;~> gary

ATTENTION WORLD!

September 22, 2009 - 22:27 ET by Blonde

Gary taught me all about Cajun martinis....he is the master, naturally.

We shall corrupt the world, Gar....one poster at a time! We are well on the way to "Mission Accomplished".

xxx ooo

I hope he fails, too.

Blonde..

September 22, 2009 - 23:00 ET by Gary Hall

Greetings.

OK, that was a little bit more credit than I was whining for - I mean, I didn't want to seem 'presidential,' and all.

I wish He'd drink a few!

(;~. gary

I can't begin to tell you, Gary

September 22, 2009 - 23:08 ET by Blonde

Whining? LOL....gosh, I've missed some of the silliness here (although CR totally rocks!!!).

How much happier I'd be if you were the President of the world. LIfe would be sweet, capitalism would rule, and idiots would run for cover!

I bet Bamster couldn't mix a martini to save his life...nor identify a tamale, or any of the things that truly matter. Anyone who is so stupid as to believeWagyu beef is the bees' knees, is, by definition, an idiot. I can conduct a symphony with a $1.29/lb. slab of pork shoulder. Well, okay, pork shoulder, (a bunch of herbs/spices) and a pile of masa harina.

Bon appetitit! (Have you seen Julie & Julia? I hear whines that it's a chick flick....but I absolutely loved it....pure entertainment!)

I hope he fails, too.

Did I miss something

September 22, 2009 - 12:51 ET by ckc1227

Did I miss something somewhere? Is it against the law to be obese now?

Not against the law, but

September 22, 2009 - 13:04 ET by JesseJacksonIV

Not against the law, but it's certainly unhealthy. Maybe if people know they have to pay a tax on a soda, they might stop drinking them and slowly get on the road to being healthier.

→ JJ IV

September 22, 2009 - 13:37 ET by Cool Arrow

And if you tax gas and/or automobiles, you'll save lives too.

Where does this nonsense end except at complete government control over all behavior?

A Democrat killed Harvey Milk, Nancy!

Heck we can tax

September 22, 2009 - 14:51 ET by general company

The airlines and save them by the hundreds, then we can bail them out with public funds. Whoohoo

My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

As a libertarian, I don't think much of taxes, period

September 22, 2009 - 13:37 ET by R D Helm

But if there is one tax I hate more than all others (save the ILLEGAL-AS-HELL FEDERAL INCOME TAX), it's the kind freedom-despising lefty-pukes always try to use to manipulate the behavior of free Americans residing in a free country.

I own my body, NOT the GD government, and certainly not these sniveling, miserable little nose-picking, booger-eating, liberal bed-wetters.

[I WILL NOT TOLERATE] government goons telling me what I can, and cannot, put into it. Not even for a second.

If I want to consume Coca-Cola by the barrel, eat sugar by the table spoon, or stuff myself with ice cream until buttons start popping off my clothing, that is MY BUSINESS, and MY BUSINESS ONLY!

-Dave

I agree with Rush. It's time for Obama to resign.