Now the President wants to tax sugar. Can salt and pepper be far behind?

September 11, 2009, 1:00 am · 9 comments

There is nothing this man won't tax. Absolutely nothing.

There is nothing this man won't tax. Absolutely nothing.

Apparently the Democrats have done extensive research and discovered that only the rich consume soft drinks.

That’s the only way to reconcile the fact that he promised no new taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 per year during the campaign, yet now favors taxing soft drinks and other sugary treats.

The President told Men’s Health magazine that he thinks we should consider taxing soda and other sugary drinks as part of health care reform.

“I actually think it’s an idea that we should be exploring,” Obama said “There’s no doubt that our kids drink way too much soda. And every study that’s been done about obesity shows that there is as high a correlation between increased soda consumption and obesity as just about anything else.”

The president noted that “obviously there is resistance on Capitol Hill to those kinds of sin taxes. Legislators from certain states that produce sugar or corn syrup are sensitive to anything that might reduce demand for those products.”

First he raised taxes on cigarettes to keep people from smoking. Then he raised taxes on soft drinks to keep people from consuming sugar.

While he’s at it, maybe he should raise taxes on thinking to keep people from figuring out what he’s doing.

Source: New York Daily News

Subscribe, tweet, share, tell a friend!

  • RSS
  • Email

Browse before and after this article

Related Posts

  1. Obama to Kim Jong-Il: “Pretty please with sugar on it”
  2. President eats cheeseburger, big news. President eats ice cream, major story. President eats caviar, ssssshhh.
  3. President Obama praises overseas tax cheat Charlie Rangel for helping him close overseas tax loopholes
  4. Most Masculine President In History drinks beer like he’s at an English tea party
  5. John Boehner sums up ObamaCare for the President

{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }

Dee Mac September 11, 2009, 5:40 am at 5:40 am

First, as a History teacher heading into a study of the causes of the Revolutionary War, THANK YOU DEAR LEADER. Now I don’t have to use the textbook, I can just teach from the headlines. April 1764 seems to be coming around again. Since that Sugar Act reduced revenue, incited smuggling, and contributed to insurrection, what do you think this one will do? Maybe modern Americans will turn sugar into booze and learn how to tar and feather too – won’t that be fun!

Side note: This administration just will not apply lessons from history and that is a shame because we will all be doomed to repeat it.

Reply to this comment

barny September 11, 2009, 6:28 am at 6:28 am

Funny thing is they won’t be able to afford making cool-aid in the ghetto.

Reply to this comment

jasonwedge September 11, 2009, 7:54 am at 7:54 am

I want to know when they will start taxing you for leaving your house…or staying in your house too long…I mean is there anything we do that does not come with some sort of risk…and the government will just say…”tax them” maybe it will curb them from doing things that may be dangerous…

Reply to this comment

Mia September 11, 2009, 9:56 am at 9:56 am

“The president noted that “obviously there is resistance on Capitol Hill to those kinds of sin taxes.”

Hey, we should tax other sins as well. Hows about we levy a 40% income tax on politicians for lying and infidelity?

Not only would we have enough to pay for truly everyone to have top-of-the-line health care, we’d erase that deficit lickety-split! ;)

Reply to this comment

ocmadam September 12, 2009, 9:22 am at 9:22 am

good point…but how can a government that wants to banish religion impose a sin tax on anything? Does that mean athiests will get to have their cake and eat it tax free?

Reply to this comment

JShope September 11, 2009, 2:24 pm at 2:24 pm

The Democrats are not even thinking things through anymore. Are they taxing soft drinks because of the sugar content? Juice and non-carbonated flavored drinks have as much, or more, sugar. Are they upset by the carbonation? If so, will the tax apply to carbonated juice drinks, like Martinelli’s Sparkling Cider? Is it due to a lack of added vitamins? If so, would adding vitamins remove the tax?

Or, is it really a simple tax increase, masquerading as a benefit to society?

Reply to this comment

bcronos September 11, 2009, 6:42 pm at 6:42 pm

I make less than $100,000 a year and he already raised my taxes almost $1000 a year by increasing the cigarette tax 2 months into office. He’s a ’say anything’ liar. 2010 is going to be a bloodbath for democrats.

Reply to this comment

Kip Hooker September 12, 2009, 7:26 am at 7:26 am

There will be no special tax on Salt ‘N Peppa. They are very popular in the hip-hop community. What will be happening with Spinderella though . . . I cannot say.

Reply to this comment

redabogado September 12, 2009, 4:37 pm at 4:37 pm

Is this picture irrefutable proof Obama sucks?

Reply to this comment

Leave a Comment

No registration is required to comment. However, Registering and/or Logging In before posting comments saves you time in future comments posting.


make custom gifts at Zazzle
  • Our Recent Favorites