13 Comments

“Executive director of CSPI found tarred, feathered; 10,000,000 American kids suspected.”

From the demand letter, I gather that CSPI is arguing that it is deceptive to market toys to children, when combined with food.

Specifically, that McDonald’s violates consumer protection codes in some states and DC. However, its demand letter does not state what those codes require or what actions by McDonald’s violates them.

Did any news reports about this potential case note the lack of legal substance in the demand letter, say by finding a law prof to query?

In general I disapprove of a vigorous fee shifting regime, but as Turkewitz often points out, blood-boiling suits like this one or another suit filed by a PETA front group to require warning labels on hot dogs, demand fee shifting and much harsher sanctions.

One might think CSPI and its ilk were trojan horses, working with the insurance industry to advance tort reform by filing the most offensive suits they can dream up.

From the article, “Citing toys aimed at promoting the latest “Shrek” movie, the Center for Science in the Public Interest said that the plastic promotions lure children into McDonald’s restaurants where they are then likely to order food that is too high in calories, fat and salt.”

I have a better idea. How about we appoint adults who have veto power over the decisions that children make? We can call those adults parents. Oh wait.

The children are not the ones ordering Happy Meals and driving themselves to McDonald’s. It is the parents who make the decisions. The toys don’t make parents choose the Happy Meals. Most parents buy Happy Meals for their children occasionally, not all the time.

Someone should tell these CSPI people where they can go. A tarring and feathering seems appropriate.

Sounds like some little group wants to raise some money and show they are still self important.

So children are eating toys that make them fat. Who knew? I wondered why I still have a big tub of Chinese Plastic that my children rarely play with. Perhaps I should serve it for dinner.

CSPI keeps trying to get me to renew–nope, not doing it. Their magazine does have some helpful information but I could no longer justify the push for big government nanny-state anymore.

Can I sue CSPI if I stroke out because of the increase in my blood pressure from hearing about their BS lawsuits?

I got an idea for their marketing department! They can call the toy-less version “Sad Meals”

What ever happened to parents saying “no” to their children? I do it all the time to my son, and he doesn’t seem emotionally scarred.

Sometimes I tell him “no” to something he wants for absolutely no reason at all; just so he remembers that he doesn’t always get what he wants.

I’m sure I’d be reported to CPS in California.

Wow, I also sometimes tell my kids “no” without a reason but to remind them I am in charge.

The words a child most hates to hear from a parent: “Because I said so.”

Perhaps McDonald’s could come up with a new packaged meal, the CSPI Sack. It could contain a gruel burger make of a mixture of whole grains and husks; shoestring fries of wood chips (organic); and a biodegradable flask of distilled water. To get kids eager to eat it, it would include the child’s choice of a hairshirt or an environmental screed.

You joke, Mr. Burgess, but I wonder what would happen if businesses like McDonald’s went on the offensive to ridicule the likes of the CSPI and educate their younger customers about these would be nannies. How about updating McDonaldland to include a new villain – The Buttinski, with his sidekick The Regulator? And a whole tribe of Busybodies who torment the Fry Kids?