Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

California

IndyJones

(1,068 posts)

7. The No ads are so misleading. Like the one where they show dog food vs a steak.

Reply to Le Taz Hot (Original post)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 04:47 AM

Oct 2012

The dog food requires labeling. Um, no kidding. The dog food contains all kinds of crap in it in addition to just plain meat. Corn, grains, etc. Of course it is going to require the labeling.

Why do they want to pretend this is going to cost so much for labeling? There are already requirements for peanuts, dairy, etc.

Yes on 37.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

No on 37 Forced to Pull TV Ad . . . [View all] Le Taz Hot Oct 2012 OP

Keep hearing the radio ads those sleazy fucks are putting out, "with major funding by Monsanto" villager Oct 2012 #1

I thought there was something bogus about that ad tularetom Oct 2012 #2

That would be the ad that claims "meat for dog food must be labeled, but not meat for humans"? KamaAina Oct 2012 #3

ohhhh, THAT ad! SoapBox Oct 2012 #4

Reality check: Anti-Proposition 37 ad is partially misleading Zorro Oct 2012 #5

For what it's worth Iwillnevergiveup Oct 2012 #6

The No ads are so misleading. Like the one where they show dog food vs a steak. IndyJones Oct 2012 #7