Freedom drinks, unless you're poor.
So
The Hill screwed up a report on the use of food stamp benefits for sugary drinks. They claimed over half of such benefits were spent on sugary drinks, when the reality is more like three percent.
Regardless of its veracity, wingnuts have jumped all over the report, oh so concerned that poor people aren't eating healthy foods!
But I'm old enough to remember New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's efforts to regulate sugary drinks in his city, precisely because of how unhealthy they are. And regardless of whether you agreed with him or not, to conservatives, it was a matter of FREEDOM! How dare government tell people what they could or couldn't eat and drink? They didn't want no stinking nanny state!
So regulating soda is bad and an assault on freedom. Unless you're poor, because soda is bad for you.
Do I have that right?