Premte Peeves

San Francisco mandates no happy ending. The city of light and love has banned happy meals. That’s a nanny too far.

Voters in the heartland have generally wanted to do the happy dance since Tuesday but S.F. banned happy dances, too.

6 thoughts on “Premte Peeves

  1. “City supervisors had been mulling the issue for months and had decided to put off voting on the ban until after voters had gone to the polls in order to make sure the measure didn’t become an election issue.”


  2. “San Franciscans tend to be liberal on the big, national and international issues…”

    Yeah, and in the best NIMBY tradition, they want to make sure there are no homeless peeps in eyesight. Rather than helping the homeless, they reduce the dole and pass anti-park-bench-sleeping laws.

    Limousine libs. I just wish we didn’t have to send them to Congress.

  3. It’s just so arbitrary. What about juiceboxes full of empty sugar calories? Cookies, candy, donuts? All the snacks parents are constantly shoving into their kids’ faces all day long because for some bizarro reason we now believe children can’t go 45 minutes without food? I don’t understand why people are constantly picking on McDonalds. If you actually READ calorie counts of restaurant choices, McD’s is FAR from the worst — many “family-style” sit-down restaurants way worse items. Macaroni Grill, Olive Garden, Cheesecake Factory (which won’t disclose counts, but you can guesstimate), etc. have horribly bad things.

  4. @Paula: You don’t live in the real Cali, do you? If you did, you’d know that it is impossible for a nanny law to be arbitrary.

    FWIW, the San Francisco “Mickey D’s” ordinance doesn’t single out McDonald’s or the Happy Meal by name. Instead it bans menu items that include toys and don’t pass the city’s nutritional muster. Macaroni Grill, Olive Garden, Cheesecake Factory, and school lunch programs are exempt because they don’t offer toys with the meal.

Comments are closed.