I wrote recently about the appalling and misguided attempts by a group called the Center For Science in the Public Interest to try to force Kentucky Fried Chicken, via a lawsuit, into changing the oil that it uses to fry it’s chicken in to an oil which is lower in trans fats. The obvious fact that anyone can decide not to eat at KFC if they were not satisfied with the way the chain prepares their food was not sufficient to keep these loons from insisting that they have a right to eat at KFC, and the restaurant should have to change their way of doing things just to cater to  them.
Well, the same fascist idiots are now attacking Starbucks in an effort to force the chain to list the fat content of all the various coffee drinks the chain serves on a board so their customers can check this vital (cough cough) information before ordering. Nevermind the inconvenient reality that most people at Starbucks won’t really care about the nutritional content of their coffee, and that Starbucks offers many healthier choices for the customers who do. It’s all just common sense. If you’re watching your calories and fat intake, don’t slather your cafe mocha with whipped cream, use skim milk instead of whole milk etc. You can’t tell me people don’t know this already without the food police attempting to cram it down everybody’s throat.
Starbucks, of all enterprises, is the latest victim of food fascists. It is ironic that the Center for Science in the Public Interest is attacking the politically-correct, rainforest-friendly, self-styled socially responsible Seattle-based corporation for clogging the arteries of Americans.
Starbucks, of course, is famous for offering its customers many choices. It’s impossible to order just “a cup of coffee.” There are two or three coffees of the day chosen from some three-dozen blends from around the world. You can get them in regular, decaf or half-caf and three different sizes: tall, grande and venti. Maybe you want a latte, cappuccino, frappuccino, macchiato, Americano or straight espresso? Perhaps you want it extra hot or with ice? Or with one of a dozen favors, malts, mochas or toppings? Or go for their teas. It’s a consumer’s dream.
But Starbucks is very conscious of its customers’ health concerns. That’s why it offers whole, skim or soy milk. Watching carbs? Try your drink “breve” with half-and-half. Watching calories? Order your latte “skinny” so you won’t fill out when you ask for “extra foam.” Or forgo the whipped cream on the more milkshake-like beverages. Or order sugar-free vanilla or hazelnut syrup. And just skip the many cake offerings altogether.
Critics charge that many Starbucks products are high in calories and high in fat, especially those tasty trans-fats that are really bad for us. So what? Starbucks offers everyone a choice. If you don’t like the venti vanilla caramel macchiato with extra whip, don’t order it. In any case, Starbucks lists on its website and in brochures in its stores the nutritional information about its products.
But that’s not enough for the self-appointed health police. They’re trying to shame Starbucks into putting all of that information on menu boards in their cafes which, aside from being redundant, would make those menus, crowded with numbers, look to most people as confusing as the big board at the stock exchange. In any case, come on people, we all know whipped cream and cakes are fattening! Starbucks’ upscale clientele is certainly educated enough to figure that out.
I’d really like to see a countersuit for harassment filed by Starbucks and KFC against these nut jobs. I doubt that they have very deep pockets, and I think that might even shut them down completely, which would certainly be no loss to society.
