null

I think I’ll grab a Big Mac this afternoon to celebrate:

A San Francisco judge has dismissed a proposed class-action lawsuit that sought to stop McDonald’s Corp. from using toys to market its meals to children in the Golden State. The suit had been filed in late 2010 by Monet Parham, a California mother of two, and The Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer advocacy group based in Washington, D.C.

The suit had claimed that the world’s biggest hamburger chain was violating consumer protection laws by using toys to lure them to eat nutritionally unbalanced meal. The lawsuit did not seek damages.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest said in a statement that it will discuss whether to appeal the case.

A little background on the “concerned mother” who the Center for Science in the Public Interest used as a front for the lawsuit:

Much of the interviewing press was happy to treat Monet Parham as a random (if oddly well-informed) California mom, but it didn’t take the blogosphere long to discover that she is apparently anything but random. Ira Stoll, who blogs at Future of Capitalism and used to put out the New York Times-tweaking smartertimes.com, soon discovered (via a commenter) that she is in fact the same person as Monet Parham-Lee, who is a “regional program manager” on the state of California payroll for child nutrition matters.

Specifically, she works on a federally funded program that campaigns to exhort people to eat their vegetables and that sort of thing.

Just a mom who can’t control what her kids eat? Nah, it was just another attempt to give the government more power and control, which is why the CSPI exists — pencil-neck buttboys for The Nanny State.

Comments

14 Responses to “Food Police Heartache: Judge Dismisses Happy Meal Lawsuit”

  1. Truesoldier__ on April 5th, 2012 7:27 pm

    So this woman works for the Federal government on a program to exhort people to eat their veggies; yet goes on to claim she cant control what her kids eat.

    Actually it does make sense. When has a Federal governement program actually done what it was created to do?

  2. ChapBix on April 5th, 2012 7:47 pm

    Just when I was about comment that she/they could consult with Barky and Moochelle about flaunting what courts decide, I read down further and find that she IS part of the administration! So, we can expect to watch them just go ahead and use the dictatorial power of the federal government anyway.

  3. SignPainterGuy on April 5th, 2012 8:54 pm

    Precedent for exactly that has been well established !

  4. SignPainterGuy on April 5th, 2012 9:00 pm

    Similar to my first thought; whatever dims / the left in general says, the opposite is true; whatever they claim a program is for, the opposite can be expected to be the result.

    'Center' – The Fringes
    'For Science' – Against Real Science or FOR Junk Science
    'In the Public Interest' – Against the Public Interest AND FOR the Interests of a Power-Hungry FEW in Government

  5. backwoodsconsr on April 5th, 2012 9:55 pm

    Liberals are so intent on being miserable they can't even be happy eating a Happy Meal.

  6. joyannaadams on April 5th, 2012 10:17 pm

    Hey…I LOVE those toys! I collect those toys! Every time a child comes to my house he is shown a big drawer full of McDonald "toys" in their packages, to pick and keep and…

    I might be breaking some law….

  7. Marshall_Will on April 5th, 2012 11:23 pm

    Let's see, hand selected euro-trash first name, hyphenated on the last, willing to jump thru hoops o' humiliation to appease her prog handlers, all to further a junk science agenda!?

    Wow SPG, I dunno'? Might want to look her 'up'? And THEN… the (6) most dangerous words in the English language: S/he would be -perfect- for you!

    JK!

  8. SignPainterGuy on April 5th, 2012 11:33 pm

    Well Bless your heart; I knew there was something I liked about you ! ;-)

    The "law" matters only if you`re using the toys as bribes to get kids to eat something !

  9. SignPainterGuy on April 5th, 2012 11:37 pm

    You`re number one, buddy !

    JK! ;-)

  10. Marshall_Will on April 6th, 2012 12:03 am

    We're just trying to be 'helpful'? Oh and the other KOD, "It's only (1) date! ( what could it hurt? )"

    Ever since Michelle posted Top Progressive Breakup Lines, can't stop thinking about it? Every time you're in public and you see these unfit Progs wearing wobbley politics on their tie-dyed sleeves, treating the help lower than trash and -demanding- service!? All I could ever think was, ( someone MARRIED that! )

    And Monet is such a lovely name…. it's almost as if she's an artist or something?

  11. SignPainterGuy on April 6th, 2012 1:13 am

    Naw, she failed her foreign language classes; thinks it`s French for, "Payment" !

  12. SignPainterGuy on April 6th, 2012 3:12 am

    This has been a good week for smackdowns !

  13. Marshall_Will on April 6th, 2012 11:15 am

    And it's only getting better! If the conversation MM had w/ Sean is accurate she has a new book coming out. Just in time for another put yer' BACK into it BHO Smackdown! Now she/we have all the PROOF that could only be speculated upon previously.

    Insofar as His picking up polling points among women voters? Wow, talk about being your own worst enemy. If "income equality" is their objective, how is giving more/most/ALL to the gov't in any way equality? Unless of course your idea of such is that we're all equally dependent on gubmint PROGrams?

    We need to get that message out.

  14. SignPainterGuy on April 6th, 2012 4:15 pm

    "…put your BACK into it BHO Smackdown !" Yep, there`s way more than enough proof out there !

    From WND email alerts this morning, I see that more Sheriffs want to open and look into Zero`s records and some media outlets are finally looking into his eligibility issues. Yep, I`m holding my breath …… it should happen any time now …… turning blue ……. Maybe I should wait ?!?!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.