Nanny Bloomberg: Cheez-Its for me, but not for thee
Among many other meddling government measures, Nanny NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg–who is mulling an independent bid for president–is infamous for banning trans-fats in city restaurants. He’s a zealot when it comes to everyone’s eating habit except his own. On Wednesday, Newsday pointed out a photo Bloomberg reaching for a bag of Cheez-Its:
They may be too unhealthy for regular New Yorkers to eat, but not so for Mayor Michael Bloomberg, apparently.
After gaining national media attention for spearheading an almost total ban on trans fats in city restaurants starting last July, Bloomberg was photographed in this month’s issue of Wired magazine munching on those very same dangerous fats.
The photo, which accompanies a short Q&A about technology and politics, features Bloomberg at his City Hall desk, looking thoughtful and serious. Meanwhile, his right hand is seen almost absent-mindedly pulling a Cheez-It out of a single-serving bag of the crackers.
The reader can only assume that the baked snack cracker is headed for the mayor’s mouth, and along with it some of the half-gram of trans fat found in every serving of Cheez-Its.
The mayor’s food choice directly counters the guidance of his own Department of Health, which specifies on its Web site that “there is no safe level of artificial trans fat consumption.” The site also points out that trans fats are responsible for at least 500 deaths in the city every year from heart disease.
The mayor’s office attempted to split hairs–and fat grams and packaging, as it were–when questioned by the NYTimes:
In response to questions today, Jason Post, a spokesman for Mayor Bloomberg, emphasized Mr. Bloomberg’s public stances — not his personal eating habits. Mr. Post said in a statement: “The New York City trans fat ban has allowed New Yorkers to enjoy healthier foods without any change in taste or in price. For packaged foods subject to federal rules, the mayor supported the labeling of foods that have trans fat in them so consumers can make informed food choices.”
Uh-huh. Let’s face it. Nanny Bloomberg’s unmistakable message is this: “Cheez-Its for me, but not for thee.”
Not long now before snack vending machines are banned on NYC government property.
This guy wants to be president.
Someone should dress up as a big Cheez-It and follow Bloomberg around in protest of his meddling health policies like the chicken that followed George H.W. Bush in 1992 or the Flipper dolphin that shadowed Mitt Romney at CPAC last year.
Any volunteers?
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Health care, Michael Bloomberg
Hotline On Call
» Chambliss Wins; 60 Eludes Dems
JustOneMinute
» David Gregory To Host Meet The Press (While Hiding From It)Belmont Club
» A self-made hellRiehl World View
» Update: Chambliss WIns Georgia Run-offGateway Pundit
» 2 Year-Old Moshe Holtzberg Was Beaten By Terrorists... His Murdered Mother Was 6 Months PregnantNewsBusters.org
» Four Years Later, Kerry Admits He's a LiberalHotline On Call
» Obama Records Radio Ad For LA House Hopeful
Any volunteers?
what’s the pay scale?
It all boils down to government cheeze once again.
Besides…It wasn’t like he was eating in a reastaurant…right? Look what an Adonnis he is. Every New Yorker should strive for the “Body By Nabisco”.
He wasn’t being a hypocrite…by purchasing said crackers then consuming them, he was doing his part to “Fight Terrorism” like the President asked.
Any of these working for ya? No?
Then I got nuttin. He’s a stinking hypocrite…and we all know how I looooove hypocrites.
Who needs the Hollywood writers, life is much funnier than anything they can dream up.
http://www.tylerpaper.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008801110310
I’d do it - but given the appearance of a Cheez-it cracker, I may be mistaken for a lefty anti-gitmo protester with my bright-orange glow….
Ok. Here’s the all important question:
Cheese-Itz or Cheese Nips? Which one do you prefer.
When I was looking for a new roommate I actually put this question on the application. Because the people who get it wrong…I just don’t see how we could be compatible living partners.
Just the age old liberal mind set of rules for thee and different set of rules for me. After all he is so important and enlightened we mere plebian dogs can’t possible fathom the greatness of the man and his mission to save us all from ourselves. He must have a genetic makeup that makes him immune from the dangers of eating transfats due to his position as part of America’s elite ruling class.
This should definitely be filed under the “you can’t make this stuff up” category
Just a little straight up, old fashioned leftist for ya. They will keep their private health care (rich leftists), YOU will go to the government clinic and stand in line. They will live in gated communities with private armed security, and ride in to the city in luxury SUV’s. YOU will live where they tell you, unarmed, and commute on a bicycle or in a hybrid. They will fly on Gulfstream private jets, YOU will be taxed until you can’t afford to go on vacation. Their speech is protected by the first ammendment, YOUR speech is hate speech and will prosecuted. They will send their kids to expensive private schools, YOU will send your kid to the local public school, even if it’s a dangerous cesspool.
Well we have to realize that eating Cheez-Its is okay for Mikey because he’s sooooooooooooo much smarter than the rest of us.
He can make an informed decision based on the product’s label, but we’re too stooooopid.
Bloviating Billionaire Bloomberg Can Stuff his independent all-about-him love affair and take a smoking leap into a vat of high transfat lard! The self-anointed elite telling the minions what they can and can’t do. Sickening.
Rusty actually makes a fine point, and I shall have to add this question to future surveys.
Also Rusty, make sure you also ask “Regular, or white chedder”.
Actually they have aleady taken over the vending machines in city buildings. A few years ago the city made a deal that they would only sell Snapple brand drinks in the Snapple supplied vending machines. At a premium I might add.
oops. I don’t think cheez-its have any transfats. might be a nonstory
http://www.cheez-it.com/
What a Hipp-o-crit.
Bloomy’s mouthpiece says he supports labeling of packaged foods “so consumers can make informed food choices”–but his ban on transfats at restaurant specifically robs consumers of the choice, informed or otherwise.
There’s a special circle in Hell for these people.
Read the story. There’s a half a gram. Bloomberg and his public health czar advocate zero tolerance.
Except for themselves.
sorry. I guess Mr Silverman has more information than what’s posted on the nutrition section of Cheez-its own website.
Well of course. Mayor Bloombat is no different than any other liberal elite.
Just FYI, I assume their talking about the regular brand Cheez-It crackers here, which you have to search a little on that website for but does say 0.5 grams of trans fat per serving.
Someone should dress up as a big Cheez-It and follow Bloomberg around…
I think a fat Tranny would be more appropriate, and a hell of a lot funnier.
Pulling a box of Cheez-it’s off the shelf (they are for my husband, I swear), I note that the 3rd ingredient on the list is vegetable oil, which names a large variety of oils, including partially hydrogenated soybean oil with TBHQ. I may be mistaken, but ‘partially hydrogenated’ means trans fats, even though it says there are 0g trans fats in the nutrition facts box.
The trans fat nazi - “No trans fat for you!!!”
ROFLMAO
#8, davidleerothmann - exactly!
And it’s Hypocrisy Friday!
I think partially hydrogenated vegetable oil (including soybean) is the same thing as MSG. Trans fat is something else.
I’m checking out the Cheez-It site, and they have multiple products. But the ones I’ve looked at say 0 grams TransFat. I might be looking at the wrong ones though.
Well, not really…
Michelle, There is something else that you missed regarding Mr. Blumberg. On last week’s episode of “The Apprentice”, Mayor Blumberg strolled down Sixth Avenue to buy a fat laden hotdog from Team Empresario. The teams were competing to see who could sell more hotdogs from outdoor carts. Ironically, team Empresario’s hot dog cart was located right outside Fox News!!! And Mayor Blumberg bought a hot dog and told the contestants that “I am New York’s leading francophile”. Now I happened to get a good look at the hot dog that Mayor Blumberg wolfed down. It was riddled with fat. And who knows how long it sat in the bin before he got to it. And since he calls himself “New York’s leading francophile” , you have to assume that he is frequently eating hot dogs from vending carts that do not tell us what the transfat content is or the cholesteral count . Team Empresario was a collection of washed up minor celebrities. I noticed MaryLu Henner dishing out the fatty hot dogs to stangers passing by 6th Avenue. Isn’t this the same MaryLu Henner who writes vegan style recipe books and lectures on healthy foods? Yet there she was trying to peddle fat laden hotdogs to the citizens. What sanctimony!
I feel like a one person research department for MM and hotair!
Heh. Well, print your first correction. It’s Marilu, for one thing, and the recipes I saw on her site had chicken and fish in them.
I’m teasing, of course. But I would call this a pretty minor bit of hypocracy on her part, compared to Bloomberg’s.
True, but MaryLu Henner sold hers at a rate that would make up for the senseless destruction of animals that goes into a Frankfurter.
Omarosa was a b*^%$ in the boardroom.
Which is perfect, considering that’s essentially what she’s famous for.
LOL
Cheez-its
Regular. Get your own box.
If I were stuck on a deserted island (btw, I’m playing Sims 2 Castaway, exceedingly fun, just thought I’d mention that) and all I had to eat were Cheddar Jack Cheez-Its, I would die a very, very happy man.
Regular or White Cheddar? Dude. Have yall not tried Cheddar Jack?
Didn’t Eddie Murphy get caught once with a fat tranny named Cheez-Louise in his car?
…booo.
HMFIC Cheez Its.
The photo can also highlight the common behavior of eating whatever is nearby when you are hungry. The restaurant trans fat ban will reduce heart disease for people on the run. For people who really want trans fats they can buy them in supermarkets and eat them at home. The government should stay out of private behavior, but having restaurants substitute saturated fats for trans fats doesn’t seem more problematic than health inspections or requiring seat belts in cars.
I’m going to head to the kitchen right after I hit the submit button for this comment to grab my box of white cheedar Cheez-It’s. Cheers, Bloomberg.
Gonna buy me a couple of boxes on my way home this afternoon
I’ve tried them all my wife get’s samples from work. There all yummy.
Rusty said:
When I was a poor starving student, it was Cheese Nips unless the Cheez-Its were on sale. But now that I’m a dad, it’s Goldfish only (in bulk from Costco).
What’s he going to do? Close up all the Starbucks and the ice cream shops too?
Cheezits rule, by far.
or 55 mph speed limits
or no smoking in workplaces
or no firearm purchase without background check
or no praying in school
or no spanking your own children
or no smoking in restaurants
or no public display of nativity scenes
or no riding in the back of pick-up trucks
or no transfats in restaurants
or no unregistered guns
or no smoking in bars
or no disrespectful, intolerant language
or no smoking in public parks
or no display of religion in public
or no smoking or guns in homes with children
or no transfats in packaged foods
or no etc…
That is the liberal mentality/strategy. Get the foot in the door and just keep pushing.
Well, I gotta admit, Goldfish are reallllly good too. Those guys are little $$ though.
Can I do it somewhere other than in New York?
There are 2 brands of cheese crackers? And different flavors too? Where have I been? I thought there was just one brand in the orangey (or is it red) box. I guess my g/f had a point when she commented that no matter what I call it, I don’t “shop” I pick out and purchase. If it is on an end-cap instead of where it belongs, I ain’t gonna find it.
People get to vote for the politicians that make the laws, and vote them out if the politician fails. Bloomberg’s smoking ban was initially unpopular and then proved popular. It’s being replicated in other cities. That’s a good example of leadership.
I’m opposed to some of the items in your list, but if you are making the case that one is liberal unless they favor zero regulations on businesses and public places, I don’t agree with you.
I prefer the Tabasco flavored Cheez-its, actually. Great on tomato soup, too.
You’re kidding - right? Tabasco flavored? Sounds good but … well, I did just find out that there are 2 different brands …
dedalus,
We do need regulation of public spaces. Behavior that can be directly harmful to other citizens should be regulated. Thus reckless or drunk driving is prohibited. Seat belts and motorcycle helmets (I always use them) may be good ideas but they are bad laws as they are personal choices that cannot direcly harm another person. Health inspections of restaurants are reasonable, since a large number of people could be harmed by an irresponsible owner. Consumption of transfats is a stricly personal matter.
My point is that liberals start out with little things that seems so obviously sensible no reasonable person could oppose them. This was the case with smoking. It started out with workplace bans (seems reasonable). We are to point it is prohibited in many bars (i.e. a place people go to drink and smoke.) Look for it to be extended to houses and cars with children. This is an example of the “Creeping Nanny State Principle.”
#48 jsr:
You’re correct.
Remember: the socialists/Communists/ fascists already seize and control (due to their taxing power) an unreasonable amount of the wealth and money created and earned by productive citizens (NOT by the socialists; NOT by the government);
therefore, they figure they can tell us how to behave, because otherwise they’ll have to spend more of what was OUR money in the first place to take care of us.
Let’s put all these nanny laws into perspective. The ONLY way the government has to enforce a law is at the point of a gun. If you refuse to comply with their law and continue to do so as the government escalates their threats, they will eventually send a man with a gun to arrest you and if you flat refuse to be arrested and act to prevent such arrest they will kill you. Period. That is true for enforcement of all government laws.
All laws, to keep perspective on the power of the government and how it is being wielded against the citizen, should start with: We the government of the people, at the point of a gun and with threat of death, hereby ….
So let’s think about this now:
At the point of a gun at with the threat of death from the government, WE, The People:
Will wear a seat belt.
Will not offer for sale trans fats in NY
Will wear a helmet.
Will not smoke in restaurants.
Will not smoke in bars.
Will use CFL light bulbs.
Will use R-134 refrigerant.
Will use 10% ethanol blends in motor vehicles.
ETC.
Ultimately, the law enforcement arm of the government can KILL YOU if you refuse to follow these rules. It is absurd!!!! If you don’t wear your seat belt the state may kill you. If you don’t use CFL bulbs the state may kill you. If you sell transfats the state may kill you.
There are some laws necessary for the preservation of life, liberty and property of others in the community. Laws against murder, rape, robbery etc. are necessary. Laws against what kind of food I eat or have access to are not necessary and to be deprived my option at the point of a gun is offensive to me on many levels and offensive to the Constitution on all levels.
I agree generally with your distinction between harming others and harming yourself.
I’m opposed to helmet laws and seat belt laws. I’m not crazy about speed limits, and often exceed them but recognize that the safety of others is involved.
I think people should be able to harm themselves with trans fats, cigarettes, and alcohol. I’m also opposed to the billions spent on the drug war, but most people are OK with paying taxes to have the government prevent that private behavior.
My preferred trans fat solution, and smoking solution, would be market-based and require signs to inform the consumer. People want to be healthier and businesses would probably move that way without the government.
That said, the trans fat ban isn’t my biggest concern about government excess.
On January 11th, 2008 at 11:30 am, rountry said:
Bloomberg was eating a snack-sized pack of Cheez-Its. It contains a half-gram of trans-fat (note the link comes straight from the Cheez-Its website you linked).
These packs are the ones you get from vending machines. The trans-fat is used to keep them tasty while they sit indefinitely in the machine.
ALSO, nutritional labeling guidelines allow any trans-fat content less than 0.5 grams per serving to be rounded down to 0 grams. So if the other Cheez-Its have 0.4 grams or 0.3 grams, guess what? They can label it as zero grams
Your (nanny-state) government at work.
Just more corruption. “Do as I say” stuff. They dictate what is good for us, while they live “high on the hog”. Some things never change, throughout history.
The smoking issue will be on the ballot in KC, some are pushing for it to include not only small bussiness, but Casino’s and Sport’s stadium’s. I live in the burbs so I won’t be voting on this issue. But wether you like it or not the nanny ban’s are just the start of a socialist state. Good intentions are’nt alway’s good.
http://www.myfoxkc.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=5457614&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=3.1.1
No joke - they’re awesome.
Unlike Trans fats, smoking is a balancing of one person’s rights to inhale smoke against another person’s rights to breathe clean air.
I can see where water flouridation might be considered an unwarranted government intrusion into our lives, but a smoking ban is about managing contending rights among citizens in public spaces.
I don’t smoke but I don’t think I should tell a private bussiness owner that he should not allow smoking in his establishment. If you don’t like to be around it don’t patronize his business instead of trying to control other’s bussiness’s to fulfill your own selfish need’s. If a bussiness owner want’s to have smoking and non smoking section then that is his choice not your’s to ban all smoking in his establishment. Tabacco is a legal substance in this country and it’s not your place to control what other’s do. I don’t drink either but I’m not advocating a ban on alchahol in all bussiness establishment’s. your argument null and void with me comrade like I said wether you like it or not the nanny ban’s are just the start of a socialist state.
From your arguments it sounds like you’d oppose the Americans with Disabilities Act as well. What about noise ordinances or zoning ordinances? Is America a socialist country because we tell private businesses what they are allowed to build and tell them what parts of town they are allowed to build it?
I never said, nor do I believe, that the government should control what people smoke.
The point is it’s not a public business, it’s private, now if you want to ban smoking in public building’s that’s fine but don’t tell me I can’t have a patron in my establishment that smoke’s. A smart business owner will have a section for both smoker’s and non-smoker’s, which most do here. What the city is advocating will hurt some bussiness’s not only that they were not going to include the Casino’s and Sport’s Stadium’s (Big Business) and that is not right in my opinion it’s just a trip down the slippery slope.
Don’t be absurd that law was passed for the disabled to have equal access to good’s and service’s.
Yeah like the noise ordinance’s are really enforced anyway. Gbump Jbump Thbump and for zoning ordinances that is beneficial to business’s. to have a business in a business district or zone not only makes it convienent for you and I it benefit’s the business, lot’s of free advertising, location, location, location you’ve heard that I’m sure, the best location is in a business district and the goal of the cities zoneing for business is tax dollar’s the better they do the more tax dollar’s a city makes. I do like the pot hole’s to go away. But tell me what’s next people can’t smoke outside thier house because some one might walk by and not like it or maybe they’ll pass a law that you can’t even smoke inside your house either or by your logic no one will be able to fart because it might offend some one. You think it’s the cities business to tell you what to eat to? I don’t like meat so everyone should be vegan’s. Pfffft!
The Americans with Disabilities Act affects private businesses. It can force a small business to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars putting in ramps and new bathrooms even if they know they don’t have any customers in wheel chairs. Your idea that a “private” business gets to do whatever it wants would disallow the ADA. Why should the government get to tell a private owner what to do?
You are going to rely on the government to tell you what is beneficial to business? Why not let the market decide? Someone with a good business idea might want to run it from their home rather than pay rent in the commercial district? Why does the government get to decide where you conduct your business and satisfy your customers?
Maybe you are already apologizing for government behavior that has put us on the slippery slope.
dedalus I think we are on the same page here we just have’nt met in the middle of it yet you make some very good point’s
The ADA is a federal law and not a city ordinance and I must agree your right it does cost to refurb a building to comply to the ADA. I don’t think that a business should be able to do what ever it want’s. That’s why law’s and ordinances are put in place, they are for those with no scruples or moral’s or concern for the public health and welfare. The fact that a business owner being forced to allow absolutley no smoking in their establishment is not fair to anyone especially smokers. It’s kind of like saying no one of Middle Eastern Decent are allowed to drive taxi’s or own convenience stores, your excluding and penalizing one demographic solely because who they are. Equal right’s under the law.
The market should decide what it want’s and the vote in this city for this has came before the voter’s before and failed, business owner’s started putting in seperate area’s for smoker’s and non-smoker’s. The city in my opinion should grant tax incentives to those who comply with a request from the city, then it would come down to the business owner’s bottom line. Money is a great motivator.
As I do 5 day’s a week my city government does not disallow me to have a home based business I just have to have the license to operate and pay my taxes. I have a friend that conduct’s his automotive repair shop at his home 3 bay’s and 2 lift’s and the city say’s nothing to him as long as he has his license and pay’s his taxes and another one that makes furniture and does wood carving from his home. I painted our logo’s on my studio and their shop’s, no phone #’s due to city ordinance but that really has’nt hurt any of us we all have our vehicles with our logo’s and info on them and all of us have people that have seen our vehicles and will walk up to our house’s or some that are curious and come up and ask what we do, we’ve all gained some customer’s that way.
My point is this should not be a win for one and loss for another, I’t should become a win win for everyone involved.
LOL, I’m the last person that will apologize for what the yahoo’s in government do.
I can see that. Good luck with your business. I operated a business in NYC and spent hundreds of hours and plenty of legal fees complying with federal, state and local regulations. I wish there were fewer. Smoking was prohibited in our office because of state law. Of all the laws we had to comply with, that wasn’t the toughest since the majority of our employees would have objected anyway to someone smoking in a conference room or shared cubicle space. While smoking in the workplace was prohibited we hired plenty of smokers who would smoke outside the building or in a park across the street.
The funniest and most irritating compliance issue I had to deal with was the California non-harassment course that restricted what you could say to an employee based on sex, race, age, etc. You really had to filter your language and pretty much avoid all jokes.