McDonald's Didn't Make Them Fat

by John Stossel - October 11th2006 - Townhall.com

I have a question for federal Judge Robert Sweet: If your own children blamed McDonald's for making them fat, would you buy it?

I don't think so.

[snip]

Whatever happened to self-responsibility? Sure, McDonald's commercials put the best spin on its products. All advertisers do that. Individuals should exercise caution, and parents should teach their kids a little skepticism. It's not as if information about nutrition is hard to come by. Today we're constantly harangued about cutting calories, reducing fat, and exercising more. McDonald's competitors, such as Subway, provide lots of counter-information. You'd have to live in a cave not to know about this stuff.

Whatever happened to self-responsibility? The question is easy to answer. Judges and lawyers figured out they can get rich if anyone with deep pockets can be sued for providing a desirable product. If it is desirable, then consumers want it. If consumers want it, then you can blame the company for making them want it. Catch 22. Anone can be sued for making a desirable product and the judges and lawyers get rich by creating more lawsuits.

This is not about protecting the public. This is in fact arrogantly indifferent to the publics loss of choice. What companies need to understand is that being more careful will not protect them from lawsuits. The next round of lawsuits will be suing companies for not providing products the consumer wants. You think the judges and lawyers will not figure out how to blame companies for that? Our society could not possibly make a company provide something you say? 40 years ago when people first started joking about suing food companies for making food that was too popular the standard response was "you have to be kidding. No one with a brain would ever allow that."

Welcome to the "rule of judges".

A Perversion Of Justice

By Burt Prelutsky - September 30th, 2006 - Townhall.com

As a general rule, I try to make allowances for human failings. That’s because, more often than not, they do no lasting harm. On top of which, they’re usually pretty darn funny.

But there’s one subject which simply has no amusing aspects. If you thought I was going to say child molesters, you’re only partly right. For as vile as pederasts, pedophiles, bottom-feeding scum-suckers, are, there are others who are even worse, if only because they are far more numerous.

For openers, there are the lawyers who use all their guile to con juries into letting these freaks run loose. I have no idea how these shysters sleep at night, knowing full well that their children and grandchildren could be the creep’s next prey.

Next we have the judges, the parole boards, the ACLU and the legislatures, who are all in cahoots to pretend that these perverts are just like other criminals.

The revolving door criminal justice system heaps lots of abuse on our citizens, but the most revolting injustice perpetrated is the injustice of freeing someone so they can prey on children. Judges, with their fervent concern for the legal fees generated by the freeing of known criminals, are simply vile when they use this evil excuse to free those who prey on children.

Again and again judges free these people, and defiantly insist they are just following the Consitution. In truth they are indifferent to the injustice they inflict on these children. They are obsessed with the "rule of judges" and the power it bestows on them. There is no justice in America. The courts are corrupt.