Harvard University researchers denied this week the charge that they omitted material information from a study they used to scare the public about soft drinks causing diabetes.

Study author Walter Willett told the Washington Post last August, “The message is: Anyone who cares about their health or the health of their family would not consume these beverages. Parents who care about their children’s health should not keep them at home.”

He said the same thing about Soda. So which is worse Dave? Why don’t you focus on the evils of Coca Cola and Pepsi first, since last time I checked, the reason we are called mammals is the “mammory glands” that lactate and produce… what the hell do they produce again? Perhaps milk from cows is not as healthy as milk from say, YOUR MOM (not yours specifically but any hypothetical mom since I have never sampled your mom’s milk–well except that once), but it sure is healthier than a can of Coke.

And before you ween us off the dairy teet, you might want to check and see if babies and children have been drinking milk since, oh, say the time when they started calling us mammals.

Any of you that have ever drank fresh dairy milk can tell the difference.

For example, if Wal-Mart wanted to [offer xyz set of employee benefits] to stock their shelves and [pay them less than $12] an hour, I wouldn’t want the government to tell them they couldn’t.

The liberal perspective would be for the government to intervene and shut them down. The libertarian perspective (at least, the animal welfare libertarian perspective) would be to hope enough people turn vegan to make dairy farms unprofitable, and thus close down.

So, then what Maryland did was wrong by your standards? Where are you at crusading against the evils of the Maryland decision on Walmart. Get your libertarian buddies together and stop these fools in charge of government form harming Walmart.