To quote one of the longer versions of the article:
Although he personally disagreed with Newsom on many issues during his two and a half year tenure, Bay County Commissioner Mike Thomas says he wrote the letter to protect the county from a possible lawsuit.
"I think he was somewhat of a zealot," County Commissioner Mike Thomas said. "I don't have a problem with him pushing an agenda, it's the way he did it. People borrowed money to go into business and they are being attacked by the government."
"The only thing I felt was inappropriate was when he was used specific names you can talk about donuts and fried chicken, cold beer and cigarettes, but when you mention names you and you do it with tax payers money that's stepping over the line," says Thomas.
________________________
I think this is the real issue. The county very well could have been sued (and successfully) for libel and slander. That he was asked to stop naming businesses by name (apparently promised to, according to some articles) and then continued to do so, was the "bottom line" issue.
I'm not sure that accusing a specific fast food chain of killing people by means of specific food items can truthfully be called "truth in nutrition."
A fit and healthy person is not going to die from eating one donu, and this is what the franchise attorneys will argue - along with the argument that the business lost revenue because of the doctor's statements (which fall under slander and libel laws if the doctor's words are even slightly untrue - exageration is as good as an outright lie in this case).
The doctor had the responsibility to keep "names" out of it. By naming the fast food providers he did arm their guns for them on the argument of libel/slander.
Last edited by kaplods; 08-17-2009 at 09:41 AM.
|
