blogsNH - Governor Lynch: Make New Hampshire the 2nd state to ban trans-fats - Comments

Comments closed

Clay McCuistion — Tue, 5 Aug 2008 14:21:54 -0400

I am also ending the comments for this post. Again, folks here have crossed the lines of civility.

Please note and remember the user agreement for blogsNH. Thank you.

More Fun Indeed

Bill Bunker — Sun, 3 Aug 2008 11:31:50 -0400

Scott,

Thanks and look at my latest post. Mr Evans, my progressive friend and email buddy has posted some talking points there. I answered them the best I could but you surely must have something to add.

More fun then we are supposed to have...

Scott Ives — Sat, 2 Aug 2008 23:34:42 -0400

Thank you all for helping me exercise my thinking muscles! I enjoy the humor the intellect and the mental sparing, I hope our left leaning friends will pitch in and rise to the challenge. If not I will continue to thoroughly enjoy all of your posts each and everyone of you.

Scott

OK Dog

Bill Bunker — Sat, 2 Aug 2008 22:59:21 -0400

Dog,

We did our best to get the discussion and debate going, to no avail.......I think this string is dead at this point.

We will continue the quest for discussion and reasoned debate if there are any takers or if there are those who can intelligently discuss issues without belief that they have it all figured out. My thought is that many are dismissive.

In any event, over the last couple of months, YOU, Judy, Scott and a couple of others have added a little life to BlogsNH so let's keep plugging to try to get discussion going.

We also have some new and interesting bloggers here as well and kudos to them for their work....it is all about discussing ideas, debate and sharing opinions, knowledge and thoughts. Pieces like Terri's this week were really thoughtful and you should give some of the others an "ata boy" once in a while....this is a good place, with or without willingness to discuss topics rationally at times.

You can count on me calling out anything political or controversial as well as discussion of other mundane topics and I will not let others go unchecked. In the end, only discourse and discussion leading to compromise will accomplish anything.

See you on the other side and until then, watch out for those dreaded trans fats and for at least one of the vessels that seems to carry them, the HMS Michael Moore.

Keep an eye out for the next "blog"...."Dog"!

Don't be dissen' the Liberati, they put you in jail.

C. dog e. doG — Sat, 2 Aug 2008 20:14:15 -0400

Bill -

I'm old school that way, I think it's the ultimate American Right (don't confuse with ultra-Right Americans) and obligation to dissent. Otherwise, we're just serfs surfin' our way to the finish line. And as far as settled, nothing is "settled" in science, even when the trans-fat lady sings. Go ask Newton, and now maybe Einstein with string-cheese theory.

Global Warming? Last I heard from scientists (not Al Gore zombies, wanna-bees, and butt buddies) delta Tº has been nearly zippo the last 8 years or so, with the exception of last year which may have dropped ~ .5 Cº, about what it rose the prior 100 years. It's surprising what the readings can be when you remove thermometers off airport tarmacs, away from AC exhaust ports, and out of our asses. Yet I think we all should burn less T-Rex fuel because it pollutes beyond each of our property lines with real pollution (SO2, NO's, particulates), not imaginary pollution (CO2).

Drilling? Again, not a big fan of the burning more stuff, but I had to admit that it would bring price down despite the incantations from the Left that it would have no affect because it would take too long - 5 to 10 years - to implement. Seems they don't understand how commodity markets work - Bush repeals the anti-constitutional Presidential Order to ban off-shore drilling, and presto, crude oil prices start to fall. Just imagine what would happen when USG (Uncle Sam Gob'mint) actually starts to sell property rights on things they don't own to oil companies so they can prepare to drill. Can you say free-fall?

By the way, my original posting was infused with references to Danny Boy's cake on face possibly containing dangerous trans-fat, irony that is steep and deep. Cricket anyone?

- Wiping donut crumbs from the corners of my mouth before Uncle Lynch shows up with his possy,

C. dog e. doG

The Question Begs

Bill Bunker — Sat, 2 Aug 2008 14:46:09 -0400

Scott,

The question begs....does that cake on Daniels face contain "trans fat"????

Just a little funny comment to lighten up the anxiety of the day.

Unable

Bill Bunker — Sat, 2 Aug 2008 13:11:43 -0400

Dog,

I think the issue is that the potential respondents are sure that their positions are fact and are beyond the point of discussion viewing their opinion as "settled".

That way, they are able to just push their agenda without the distraction of dissent. Like when they say that global warming is "settled" science or gas prices are "settled" and will never go down no matter how much we drill.

The trans-fat issue on this blog was "settled" with no room for discussion. That, in a nut shell is it....Dog.....thanks for your support of free speech and discussion and keep the responses to the blogs coming.....as far as this one is concerned.....I once again hear crickets.........

From Phat Fannies to ... kitty cats?

C. dog e. doG — Sat, 2 Aug 2008 10:03:07 -0400

Bill -
Thanks for the wink of an eye, the nod of the head, the tip of your hat - you inspire me. I do find a good many of these topics of interest, but am disappointed by the lack of participation by liberals. If the liberati consider discussion pointless with those with whom they disagree, then what do they think about sitting around the electronic water cooler reciting DNC talking points with others from the same flock. Up here in the mountains we call that mental masturbation, and what's taking place down in the dales from my vantage point looks a lot like a bible thumpin' religious revival. I thought liberals were against that sort of thing?

Now I'm not attacking religion here, but I do believe in calling a quacking, waddling duck a duck. I thought these blogs were meant for more than ceremonial psalm recitations at a religious rally. That's why I like posting on your blog - whether we agree or not, I can expect an engaged mind replying at wits end, especially when we disagree!

Sooo, what does a brother have to do around here to have a debate with a liberal? I feel like breakin' out in song: Where have all the liberals gone, long time passing ... Do we have to go underground to recruit some blacksheep Bolsheviks? Have they all retreated to the holy ground - DNC blog sites - where non-socialism heresy is banned? I've often heard conservatives comment that once liberals are cornered, they either flee or throw personal attack grenades because either they are insufficiently capable of presenting a coherent argument, or the ideas they espouse are empty rhetoric. I previously thought such comments to be partisan sour grapes, but at this juncture I'm not so sure; the evidence is building, blog by blog.

Now, I'm just as much a fan of kitty kats as the next straight guy (after all, I am C. dog e. doG), but isn't that the job, nay, the calling of the Concord SPCA to find the lost ones? Noble intention, but I too wonder about the timing to take it off the front pages as you did. That's why I check hot topics instead, they're so hot. Riddle me this, Riddler: Is a cat in the hat worth two in the bush? hmmmm.

- Thinkin' of kitty cats while watching beautacious butts bouncing on bikes high in the White Mtns,
C. dog e. doG

Ok Dog

Bill Bunker — Fri, 1 Aug 2008 22:53:27 -0400

As usual, a reply with insight and humorous as well. All of us have tried to solicit a response from Daniel so that we can discuss this openly with back and forth. My guess is that will not happen, but, we can keep on trying on this blog. I often do not understand why people with opposite viewpoints do not respond but I had an acquaintance tell me once:

"People don't like your views and they find it a waste of time to disagree". Another liberal told me: "you are not going to change your mind so what is the point".

To me, discourse is healthy and that is what a blog is all about. But now we are on to kitty cats and this post is conveniently off of the front page. However, Dog, as they say...."there is more than one way to skin a cat". So we continue to fight with facts and ideas and maybe, just maybe, we will get some stimulating debate.

My fear is that those who say things like: "what is the point.....you are not going to change your views" are also unwilling to listen to reasoned debate and change theirs. In that case our posts are and will always be considered "garbage".

Hey....stop with that obsession of bouncing butts on bikes........you are really out there pal!

Some Fat soooo Phat! Some not.

C. dog e. doG — Fri, 1 Aug 2008 14:56:35 -0400

Stop right there, Danny boy! This is the freedom police! Now gently put down your trans-fat-infused cake, step back with your hands in the air where we can see them, place them against your hydrocarbon-burning-internal-combustion motor vehicle with your legs spread, and wipe that mess from your face.

Now that we have safely disarmed you, let's calmly discuss the topic(s) you brought up in this still open forum.

There is much information from a variety of scientists - not "documentarians", political hacks, poly-ticks, Carbo gurus, etc. - that certain fats are not fattening or bad for you. In fact, many fats are downright necessary to function optimally. Looking for evidence? Try examining the diets of various indigenous peoples still eating "old school". Much of it is rift with fat - be it butter, fish oils, blubber, lard - and yet they don't look anything like obese Americans. Part of them not having fat fannies is they do get up off their ass to do real work (physics: Force X Distance = Work) daily, and not sitting around the computer blogging all day. Darn! But an amazingly important element, and seemingly paradoxical to those steeped in religious beliefs promulgated and preached heavily starting in the '70's: eating fat can make you look phat. Now how's that? Suggested reading to support this scientific view point: Ultra-Metabolism, Eat Fat, Loose Fat, and a variety of publications by Dr. "Zone". By the way, as my bio' states, I'm 6' 1, and I'm tons of fun, and I eat fat every day. But add an infusion of daily crackers and even lean ol' me starts puttin' on the puppy belly. And no one wants to see a puppy belly, and certainly nothing larger - a pear or apple, perhaps something larger?

And yes, all the folks writing these corrections to the USDA food pyramid also write trans-fats are bad, yes, the very fats your buddy(?) Ralph Nader, Superhero to the massive asses, was pushing some decades ago upon an unsuspecting and therefore easily duped populace. Don't believe me? Look it up. So let me get this straight. First, your government and its minions foisted this terrible substance upon us brain-enfeebled serfs, and once hooked, now wants to take it away from the resulting hydrogen-infused-oil addicts? Now that doesn't sound very magnanimous, does it? Remember, fat kids love cake! And now you want to take it away from them. Think of the children. Don't they deserve a treat now and then?

(I wonder if trans-fat oil is related to that other oil "our" government had a hand in making us dependent upon? hmmmm.)

And what is it with the conservative domination of the Monitor Blog-a-dome? First, we have liberal blog personas who have a blogo-drama meltdown when they receive honest, critical rebuffs from conservatives regarding obvious liberal agenda pieces. Then we have bully liberal weeny divas like Mikey Evans who try to execute their drive-by character assassinations without being called to task for doing so, then go undercover when they and their tired, trite ideas are soundly and resoundingly ridiculed. Sooo Danny Boy, who are you? Are you just another Mikey who can't take a little heat - and believe me, it doesn't get much more tepid than Mr. Bunker's replies - or are you going to support your original assertions, and/or God forbid you publicly correct a mistaken view you may hold from time to time?

So be the bigger boy, Danny, and admit that in a "live free or die" state, it's a contradiction to have the state force people not to sell and/or buy trans-fat. Beware the slippery slope you would then proceed down ... it ends up in liberty! And Nanny McFanny State wouldn't like that, would she? It doesn't fill office space up on Hazen Drive.

By the way, given your employment history, dare I say we (not just me) are not surprised by your expansive government views and ideas. I don't recall one blog entry of yours that called for an actual contraction of government corpulence. Therefore, implement your idea where it will do the most good: the ever more morbidly obese Government. You may recall from your earlier blog topic ("Governor Lynch Should Consider 4-Day Work Week") I provided quite a starting list for removing trans-fat from your government by playing the highly entertaining game of PuNoPo - NH (Purge Non-essential Positions from New Hampshire Government). So get with the NH spirit and get your head in this game. Is there one agency, division, department, even one stinkin' seat for a trans-fat-infused fanny hidden in some nondescript cubicle in a big-box building residing somewhere on Hazen Drive that you would get rid of? Dare you go on record, Danny boy?

- Conjuring no-fat phat campaign slogans I can get behind to unleash the svelte fanny within us all, be they bouncing on bikes or jiggling to Irish jigs.
C. dog e. doG

Bill, your posts on this subject...

Scott Ives — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 08:58:56 -0400

As usual are both entertaining and insightful. The only thing offensive here is the inability of some to respectfully disagree. On this issue it is clear to me that yet another government regulation will not change peoples choices it will simply add another category of crime and turn over weight people who use these products into criminals. Wow, can you imagine...so what are you in for? Two all beef patties, special sauce, cheese, lettuce, pickles, on a sesame seed bun!

Thanks again,

Scott

Freedom

Bill Bunker — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 22:51:12 -0400

TOUCHE' Scott!!!!

"Freedom is scary...it comes with the responsibility to make decisions; some good, some not so much, but still they are mine to make. I do not trust you or any government that believes it has the right or worse the responsibility for making this type of a decision. Trust freedom and you will never regret the decision!"

That says it all. My question is, what is next, watching out for our sugar intake or our salt intake or restricting our intake of coffee or tea.

I heard on the news today that over 80 establishments in New York City are being fined for not posting calories on their menu and menu boards. McDonalds happens to be one of them....are you telling me that people have no idea that eating at McDonalds is not healthy and that the food is high in calories. Well, maybe if you live under a rock....

Cradle to grave.......cradle to grave........these folks just don't get it.

Well Said

Bill Bunker — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 22:47:18 -0400

Well said, Judy.

Of course, this is not a 'political' issue............

Just say no!

Scott Ives — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:38:37 -0400

Hi Daniel,

While I am pleased to acknowledge your concern for our health, I am bewildered by anyone who believes they know what's best for me and my family. Freedom is scary...it comes with the responsibility to make decisions; some good, some not so much, but still they are mine to make. I do not trust you or any government that believes it has the right or worse the responsibility for making this type of a decision. Trust freedom and you will never regret the decision!

Governor Lynch: Please Don't Take Away My Rights..

Jehardy — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 19:27:23 -0400

Daniel,

This is one of those topics that I believe comes down to personal responsibilty. I know I need to walk 3 miles a day, eat better and do other things to prolong my life. I, as a fairly responsible citizen with a working noggin' - should be able to do this as everyone else (or not) - without the government telling me what to do.

Tell folks what they cannot have, and you'll have secret, rebel, transfat frialators in every other cellar. I say this in jest of course.. and I appreciate your thoughts. However... Banning what we can or cannot eat is the first step down a slippery slope to socialism and communism. Thanks, but No thanks.

We don't need more Gub'mint intervention, but to start being responsible for all of our own lives without it, however possible.

Judy

PS Michael Moore IS a crackpot, IMHO. Not sure what he's consuming, but it must be 80% trans-fat. ;)

Governor Lynch: Make New Hampshire the 2nd state to ban trans-fats

Daniel Hynds — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 22:07:04 -0400

Governor Lynch has always been someone that firmly believes in the health of the citizens of New Hampshire. Afterall his wife works at the cholesterol treatment center at Concord Hospital.

The hospital recently reviewed their cafeteria menu, and said good bye to unhealthy choices. For many of the items on the menu you can get the nutrition information. In turn, this helps people make better choices, as well as bring awareness to what they are putting in their mouthes.