Posted on 09/17/2009 5:38:09 AM PDT by shortstop
I don’t like soda pop.
It’s bad for you, it’s a waste of money, it rots your teeth.
I don’t like soda pop.
So I don’t drink it.
That’s how freedom works. If you like soda pop, you drink it. If you don’t like soda pop, you don’t drink it. It’s a great system.
But Obama wants to screw with it. In an era in which the federal government seems intent on taking both your freedom and your money, the new target is soda pop.
Get ready to get hosed.
If you resist, you are a racist.
This week, in one of the millions of magazines to put him on the cover, the president says of Democrat plans to put a nationwide soda-pop tax in place, “I actually think it’s an idea we should be exploring.”
Of course he does.
Coca-Cola has money. He wants it. You have money. He wants it. Of course he favors a tax on soda pop.
In the name of saving fat kids from themselves, the people at Pepsi have become the new Joe Camel. You can Do the Dew, but only if Uncle Sam gets his cut.
Of course, he already does. America’s soda pop companies pay taxes through the teeth. They are already subject to all the redistributive business taxes that have strangled American commerce to near the point of collapse.
This would be a surtax.
A tax on top of a tax. It would be one of those justice taxes. You know, the ones where they take away your money because it’s your money and they want it to be their money.
Anyway, there being no end to ways to make highway robbery a national policy, the argument is made that if a tax is put on soda pop, stupid people who’ve never heard of calories will notice the increase, rethink their wanton ways, and drink something healthier.
This con allows the thieving Democrats to both take your money and pretend to be saviors of mankind.
This works off the premise that the tax policy is a tool of social engineering. Presumably, according to this crazy piece of paper called the Constitution, the purpose of taxation is to raise revenue. Revenue is what they need to pay their Acorn contracts. Anyway, raising revenue isn’t enough for these cats. They’ve decided that taxing is a way to get you to do what they want.
Which is interesting because that crazy Constitution says that the government is supposed to do what you want, not the other way around.
Thankfully, Obama is smarter than the Constitution and can save us from old-fashioned ideas, like liberty and private property.
But back to soda pop.
Yesterday this Baucus guy out of Montana said that he had solved our health-care problems. Which is exactly what we need – one more Democrat telling 300 million people how to live their lives. Let’s see, he said that if you don’t have health insurance you have to pay $3,800 to the government, and on top of all the taxes it already pays, he said that the health-insurance industry would have to pay a $6 billion annual fee, and the medical-instrument industry would have to pay a $4 billion annual fee.
Try not to think what that will do the cost of health insurance and condoms.
Anyway, Montana – which has one-third the population of St. Louis – somehow ends up with a guy who gets to decide the future of American health care. Thankfully, he has lots of help from people like Nancy Pelosi and that Democrat congressman who thinks “You lie!” means the country is being taken over by the Ku Klux Klan.
These are the folks who are getting turned on by the idea of a federal soda pop tax.
See, what’s happened is they’ve looked at the American economy and sorted through which segment they want to take over next. Since January they’ve gotten the banks and the car makers, and they’ve just about wrapped up the medical segment, so now they’re going after food.
They learned that in feudal times – the serfs get a lot less uppity if you kept the grain in your barn.
Also, they figure that pretty much everybody has to eat.
So in the name of saving stupid people from becoming fat, food is the new tobacco and the government has to save us from the evil people who feed us. And don’t be confused – the real target is food. Yes, there are gazillions to be made by a sin tax on soda, but that’s just going to be blood in the water for these sharks.
And it won’t be long before they point out that, holy cow, soda pop isn’t the only thing with calories. Before long, some Marxist will point out that Oreos may not be nutritionally sound, and that potato chips are suspect, as well as anything that used to go “moo,” “oink” or “cluck.”
In the name of saving us, they will bankrupt us. They will tax our food. And a nation long blessed with plentiful, inexpensive food will face a government-induced famine of affordability. As if the ridiculous ethanol fantasies of these global-warming cultists didn’t do enough to trash your grocery budget.
The first step is taxing soda pop.
So stupid people don’t get fat.
Especially poor stupid people. See, the use of soda pop and the incidence of obesity are highest among the poor. Specifically, among those on some sort of welfare program. The Democrats – who were elected by those people to write them a bigger welfare check – work really hard to think of a new way to move money from your paycheck to someone else’s welfare check.
So this concern for fatness puts the Democrats in something of a pickle. Thankfully, hypocrisy is something they’re very comfortable with?
What am I talking about?
Food Stamps.
See, the people most likely to misuse their soda pop are the people least likely to pay for their soda pop. In another demonstration of federal-government brilliance, soda pop is covered by Food Stamps. So poor people won’t end up paying the new soda pop tax – the taxpayers who pick up the tab for Food Stamps will.
Let me review: You are going to be taxed on your soda pop, and on the soda pop you buy for the guy who stays home all day watching “Judge Judy.”
And if you resist, you’re a racist.
CNBC is running a piece this morning called “America’s Bad Behavior Reform” about health habits and what needs to be done to “fix it”. So much for freedom.
I see a Boston Root Beer Party in Boston Harbor in our future.
And all my customers laughed when I said sody pop and snacky stuff would be next to be taxed into oblivion back in April.
Mr. Obama, why do you hate small store owners and widows so much?
Cigarette taxes are runninglow. They killed that Golden Goose and are now hunting a new goose.
One thing—and one thing only—I thank hussein for...he taught America—most...many...Americans nor to be skeered sh!tless about somebody calling them racists!!!!
THANK GOD!
Semper Fidelis
Dick Gaines
*****
Hope he goes ahead with it. This is a tax that, IMHO, will affect the poor than the rich. If the pubbies have the sense to point that out, we MIGHT gain some traction.
RESISTANCE IS FUTILE er RACISTS
only people making more than $250,000 drink soda...
Now that Michael Jackson has departed Obama wants to be the new King of Pop.
It will slowly dawn upon the public that, of all the institutions of society, it is unfettered government which will by bar prove to be the cruelest and greediest.
It will slowly dawn upon the public that, of all the institutions of society, it is unfettered government which will by far prove to be the cruelest and greediest.
That was a precursor to Michelle’s healthcare tour. Coming soon to a venue near you.
1. Every year the federal government runs a deficit the tax on federal level politicians would be 3 millage points of the total federal budget deficit.
We must make the politicians at all levels believe we are serious about our dislike of being taxed too heavily.
You know the obvious next step? I mean, if you want to prop up the medical system by taxing those whose personal behavior puts them at risk for the consumption of medical services, it’s time to tax the homosexuals. And until you are willing to do that, Mr. President, get your damn hands off my KFC and my Big Gulp.
SIR, you have a GREAT IDEA!!!
Not so fast pardner.
Before they get to surtaxing food they'll be taxing the air with Cap and Trade, which is a massive global monetization of the air, combined with a perpetual skim/vigorish in the "Trade" component, for criminal enterprises such as Al Gore's Generation Investment Management LLP and Goldman Sachs.
And the Baraqqis are surprised that business isn’t hiring?
Every program they propose screws business.
....there’s something about this tax that reminds me of the British Stamp Act of 1765....and we all know how well THAT went over with the American public.
I always thought it was unconstitutional to use taxes for behavior modification. I thought Congress could pass a law banning a product but couldn’t use exorbitant taxes to curtail its use. Am I wrong here?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.