Idiocy: Nutella “victims” incapable of reading a label

Apparently we’re all exempt from reading government-mandated nutrition labels on our own.

Two moms sued Ferrero USA because they claimed the advertising of the popular European spread led them to believe the product was healthy as it contains hazlenuts, skim milk powder, and cocoa powder.

Apparently they never noticed it was sweet.

Really sweet.

Seriously, who fails to understand that even though something contains healthy ingredients, it might not be the best choice?  From American Thinker:

The  origins of the suits (one for California, the other for the rest of the country)  started with an epiphany that plaintiff Athena Hohenberg of San Diego  experienced last year. The mother of a 4-year-old said she was “shocked” to  learn Nutella chocolate spread was in fact loaded with calories and sugar, even  though its advertising noted that it contained some wholesome products —  hazelnuts, skim milk and such. It’s unclear how this epiphany occurred.  Could it be that Hohenberg finally bothered to look on the ingredients that  Nutella always had on the back of its labels?

As the mother of a four year-old, I’m shocked that another mother could be so stupid as to argue in a court of law that she’s completely incompetent to feed her children without being supposedly swayed by false advertising. Read. The. Label.

Who gets fattest (metaphorically speaking, of course) off the $3.5 million settlement? 25% goes to the lawyers. The rest of the idiots incapable of reading and making a decision can apply for $20 bucks, enough to buy 5 more jars of Nutella. What’s next? The total ban of food advertising? Or a section of the grocery stores of all the “bad” stuff?

By the way: I don’t bother with bread for Nutella. I just lick the spoon. With glee.

 

A Nightmare That Will Last Forever

“All we wanted was a family. Instead, we were landed with a nightmare that will  last forever,”

So says an embittered consumer who didn’t get the commodity she ordered an anguished mother who was implanted with the sperm from a man with a different race.  

More family structures are crashing down.  As IVF numbers increase, the children “mistakes” increase…

 The largest sperm bank in Britain is under investigation from health  officials over claims they used sperm from the wrong donor after a gay couple  had two children from different racial backgrounds.

The alleged mix-up at the IVF clinic only emerged after the birth of the  couple’s second child, who is of different race to the rest of the family.

The parents are said to be “devastated” at the alleged mistake as they had  wanted their children to be genetically related by using the same sperm donor,  The (London) Sunday Times reported.

The damage to the [younger] child in the future, to both the siblings and  the family unit could be quite catastrophic,” said Caron Heyes, the couple’s  lawyer.

How quaint…the gay parents who are unable to produce children as a couple wanted to hold on to the old fashioned notion of actually having their children share the same genes!  So…not having the same sperm donor is catastrophic to the family unit, whilst the whole artificial conception, two mommies thing is ummm…what exactly?  Newsflash, ladies: the damage to the family unit was done long before the clinic mixed up fathers sperm vials.

 

Heh: how to combat the legions who believe the lies

Humor helps.

H/t: Allahpundit

Supercuts stylishly affordable

Oh, how the mighty have fallen.

Apparently John Edwards coifs his mane at Supercuts for $12.95 these days, a far cry from the $1,250 he spent per cut during the heady days of the ’08 campaign.

And as Styleite notes, his hair looks no different.

Ouch!

Going rogue: elite Afghan soldier kills US Special Ops mentor

The translator, too. So much for being so closely vetted. Get our guys the hell out:

An elite Afghan soldier shot dead an American mentor and his translator at a U.S. base, Afghan officials said on Friday, in the first rogue shooting blamed on the country’s new and closely vetted special forces.

The soldier opened fire at an American military base on Wednesday in Shah Wali Kot district, in volatile Kandahar province, said General Abdul Hamid, the commander of Afghan army forces in the Taliban’s southern heartland.

“The shooting took place after a verbal conflict where the Afghan special forces soldier opened fire and killed an American special forces member and his translator,” Hamid told Reuters.

At least 18 foreign soldiers have died this year in 11 incidents of so-called green on blue shootings, which are an increasing worry for both NATO and Afghan commanders, eroding trust as Western combat troops look to leave the country in 2014.

The latest shooting will be of grave concern to both sides, at it is the first involving a member of Afghanistan’s new special forces, which undergo rigorous vetting as part of their selection into the country’s top anti-insurgent force.

Rigorous vetting.

“When we analyze the problem, it occurs for a number of reasons, and not as many as you would expect show any evidence of insurgent initiation, or insurgent backing,” a senior NATO official who could not be identified said last week.

“Quite often people resolve their personal problems by resorting to the use of a weapon. It’s more of a cultural thing here.”

We will not change the tribal culture in Afghanistan. It’s long past time to go. As Mark Steyn wrote last month in the wake of the murder of two American officers:

Say what you like about Afghans, but they’re admirably straightforward. The mobs outside the bases enflamed over the latest Western affront to their exquisitely refined cultural sensitivities couldn’t put it any plainer:

“Die, die, foreigners!”

[…]

In Afghanistan, foreigners are dying at the hands of the locals who know them best. The Afghans trained by Westerners, paid by Westerners and befriended by Westerners are the ones who have the easiest opportunity to kill them. It is sufficiently non-unusual that the Pentagon, as is the wont with bureaucracies, already has a term for it: “green-on-blue incidents,” in which a uniformed Afghan turns his gun on his Western “allies.”

So we have a convenient label for what’s happening; what we don’t have is a strategy to stop it – other than more money, more “hearts and minds” for people who seem notably lacking in both, and more bulk orders of the bestselling book “Three Cups Of Tea,” an Oprahfied heap of drivel extensively exposed as an utter fraud but which a delusional Washington insists on sticking in the kit bag of its Afghan-bound officer class.

Read the rest.

H/t: Hot Air headlines

When the box doesn’t fit

Bend and stretch.

Justice is colorblind. Too bad our society no longer is after the multi-culti hogwash that has bread out of us the notion that we are all American, but we are now a check-the-box ethnicity. The folks who went out of their way to brand George Zimmerman as a “white Hispanic” as opposed to “Hispanic” will now have to eat their words.

Why?

Turns out he’s black, too. Is it enough that it’s check-the-box-black?

Waiting for the race baiter Al Sharpton to apologize in 3, 2…

A parent’s worst nightmare…?

Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we ad-lib to conceive…

From LifeSiteNews

Single mom wants baby.

But she’s on a budget, so sperm donor is out of the question.

So she goes the way of “ex-boyfriend with benefits” – sorta – she pays him $1400 for his “service”
– you know his guy friends were fist bumping, “Duuuuuddddeee! Score!”

For the next three years, she allows her daughter’s father (ex-boyfriend with paid benefits) to visit his daughter.

When her daughter is three years old, mom dies of cancer. Absolutely  horrible for such a young child to lose a parent…but because of her non-traditional family, insult is added to injury as an ugly custody battle ensues: (emphasis mine)

The ex-boyfriend of the deceased single mother then entered the scene  to make a parental claim for the young girl, arguing that he was her legal father. The case appeared before a Quebec court. The ex-boyfriend won a paternity ruling from the Quebec Court of Appeal last year, and that ruling was upheld last month when the Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear an appeal of the case.

Michael Lubetsky, the lawyer who represented the girl’s grandparents at the appeal court, told the National Post that it is a parent’s “worst nightmare” that a biological parent can “show up and start asserting rights over the child.”

“That’s incredibly disruptive…. It’s an attack on the family structure,” he said.

I had to read that a few times and wonder, “Have we gotten to the point that we are saying that with a straight face?” An attack on the family structure? WHAT FAMILY “STRUCTURE” ARE WE TALKING ABOUT HERE?

Structure,  loosely defined,  is something made up of parts, held or put together in a particular way.

Structure

Not stucture

This is what happens when we start tinkering with a STRUCTURE that has been in place and worked for thousands of years.  When we embark in a DIY “structure” it all comes crashing down on us, sooner or later.  And the children are the ones who get crushed.

UPDATE: linked by Lin at No One of Any Import and a Recommended Read of Pundette’s! Thanks!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 342 other followers