« AP: Pro-Lifers Greater Terror Threat Than Muslims | Main | Obama's Communist Mentor »

February 20, 2008

UK Nanny-State Obesity Jihad Wants to Go Global

It's not enough for British nanny-staters to tell their own subjects how much they can weigh. The whole world must obey moonbat dictates from atop the bureaucracy. After all, it's for our own good:

The chairman of the International Obesity Taskforce wants world leaders to agree [to] a global pact to ensure that everyone is fed healthy food.
Professor Philip James [of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine] said the challenge of obesity was so great that action was needed now, even without clear evidence of the best options.

Sound familiar? The global warming hoax is only the beginning of the liberal elite's international war on freedom.

James also demands "stricter rules on marketing and food labeling" — to be imposed worldwide, without regard to national sovereignty.

For the first time in memory, the bureauweenies in Brussels are the good guys. James whines:

This is a form of public education which is being resisted mightily in Brussels with intense lobbying of commissioners who've just announced that they won't go down the British road.

Not even EU Eurotwerps are foolish enough to go down the road Britain has been taking lately.

On a tip from Burning Hot.

Posted by Van Helsing at February 20, 2008 7:50 AM


I find it astounding that Brussels isn't on board with this one. It is obviously a follow-up to the vast success of global warming in weakening the stronger sovereign states' belief in their own sovereignty (such as the US). Now that we have all been humbled and shamed by the ability of the Global Warming Machine to roll over us and make us sorry for all we've done, a Global Obescity Panic is the next logical step. The bureaucrats in Brussels should be ejaculating on their desks for this one, pondering whole new organizations within the UN, and entire new institutions in Europe to monitor, measure, meet, warn, implore, condemn, deplore, advise, and most of all ....... collect.

The Brussels folks have lost their edge. Global Warming is getting tired, but tens thousands of Europeans depend on some sort of ongoing panic for their livelihoods. This is a great opportunity. They could appoint a Special Rapporteur for Obescity and Palestine, and it'd be off to the races for 10 more years.

Posted by: Anonymous at February 20, 2008 8:04 AM

that is my post ... mega ... above, btw

Posted by: mega at February 20, 2008 8:04 AM

"We're going to take things away from you, for the Common Good" - HRC, 2004.

Apparently, the right to choose what food to eat, what car to drive, what talk radio we may listen to, what opinions we may express, where and how we are allowed to travel, where we may live, what type of home we may live in, what the temperature inside our home will be, whom we may employ, what values we're allowed to teach our children, our right to defend ourselves, our right to use our own property for our own benefit, are but a partial list of the freedoms liberal fascists want to take away from us "for the common good." In exchange, we get to have sex with anyone we want (unless they sue us for "sexual harassment" or "date rape.")

Posted by: V the K at February 20, 2008 8:41 AM

Liberal facist??? I love it. Facism is a radical right wing ideology. If you can't win an argument just throw out the word facist even if that is what YOU are.

V the K - civilized, developed socities require a semblance of sanity and laws inorder to function. In your world there would be utter chaos.

Are you always such a b*tch when you don't get your way? Are you authoritarian? Do you have no tolerance for differences b/t people? Do you see everyhting in black or white? Does nuances bring out the ugly feelings in you?

Typical radical right winger

Posted by: Anonymous at February 20, 2008 8:54 AM

Liberalism always leads to fascism. Liberals love govt regulating every aspect of our what we drive, eat, smoke, etc. ut Fascism has always been a liberal ideology, but then most liberals don't know what they're talking about.

Posted by: JamesB at February 20, 2008 9:01 AM

No, I'm the one who wants people to be able to make decisions for themselves. It's the left-wing who want to take away people's freedoms. Whether it's in the name of "social justice" or "fighting Global Warming" the end result is the same. Progressives are, and always have been, fascists who want to take away individual freedom for some concept of the "common good." The list I gave in the previous response was just a partial list of the freedoms progressive fascists aim to take away. Do you dispute any of them?

Posted by: V the K at February 20, 2008 9:04 AM

Facism is a right-wing ideology? Dude do you have ANY idea what you are talking about? I mean, forget about actually studying and understanding a subject ... have you ever bothered to type the word "Fascism" into Google to see what comes up?

Fascism = state management and control of the private economy
Facism = concentrated, centralized government power exerting influence on all areas of private life
Facism = executive power unchecked by other institutions, government or private

"Right-wing" = limited government, and a private economy free from government interference.

At some point, even you will tire of your high school sophomore buzz words and actually try to learn something.

Posted by: mega at February 20, 2008 10:18 AM

V the K,

What freedoms have progressiuves taken away from you. What about the conservatives that want to deny gay couples the freedom to marry? Including Mary Cheney

Freedom means freedom for all not just for some -which is your definition.

Posted by: Anonymous at February 20, 2008 10:35 AM


Yes facism is a right wing ideology. I studied it as a political science major. Hitler was a fascist. He also used christianity to advance his agenda.

Fascism is characterized by authoritarianism which is the hallmark of those on the radical right.
The conservative mindset is one of intolerance for differences - the psychology of a conservative is based on fear of the "other" and a discomfort with anything that is not in simple black and white terms.

Conservatism is literally a psycholoigcal disorder.

Posted by: Anonymous at February 20, 2008 10:40 AM

anonymous hashidiot:

Right wingers strive for LESS government, unlike fascists. Or didn't your liberal professors tell you that?

"Conservatism is literally a psycholoigcal disorder."

Learn how to spell psychological, moonbat. It's been proven that libtards are unhappy nitwits. Try reading a book.

Posted by: Kristy at February 20, 2008 10:50 AM

OK, I'll bite:

Progressive Fascists against food choice: See the thread topic. Also, transfats banned in NYC and other jurisdictions. Lawsuits against fast-food restaurants. Laws proposed in Mississippi against allowing obese people to eat. Goose liver pate banned in Chicago.

Progressive fascists against vehicle choice: Congressional fuel mandates. Sierra Club proposes banning SUV's. Environmental eco-fascists vandalize SUV's.

Progressive Fascists Against Property Rights: Eminent Domain abuse. Oregon's Measure 37. The Endangered Species Act. Robert Mugabe. Hugo Chavez. Condos, new homes, and ski resorts torched by eco-fascists.

Progressive Fascists Against the Sanctity of Home: California proposes requirement for state-controlled thermostats in all new housing. Smoking bans in private homes proposed in California and Montgomery County MD.

Progressive Fascists Use Public Schools for Political Indoctrination: Global Warming mandate in California. Pro-Gay and transgender curricula mandated for public schools in California and elsewhere.

Progressive Fascists Against Freedom of Speech: Campaign finance regulation. The fairness doctrination. Censorship and censure of conservative groups on university campuses. Hate speech laws. The Canadian Human Rights Commission cracking down on those who criticize Islam or Homosexuality. Speech codes.

Progressives against freedom of movement: Proposals in Britain to limit airline travel to one trip per year.

Not all of these have affected me, but they show what the goals of progressive fascism are. And each of those freedoms is far more universal and important than the "right" of same-sex couples to have a piece of paper from a state bureaucracy blessing their relationship.

Posted by: V the K at February 20, 2008 11:43 AM

A little education: How progressive fascists in Oregon destroyed property rights before Measure 37.

"One campaign advertisement showed a woman who was penalized for cutting blackberry bushes in her back yard in Portland — because it might become wildlife habitat. Not that it was wildlife habitat, that it might become wildlife habitat."

Posted by: V the K at February 20, 2008 11:47 AM

In the final analysis, vastly larger numbers of Americans have had their freedoms taken away or infringed upon by progressives than by the Patriot Act or the Bush administration.

Posted by: V the K at February 20, 2008 12:13 PM

V the K,

Whats wrong with banning trans fat? Why should I pay extra for health insurance b/c some families suffer from extreme obesity b/c of their suicidal food choices?

What is wrong with HEALTH? What is good about HEART attacks AND diabetes.

While we are at it - why don't we allow drunks to drive? That is freedom of choice.

Let's let people do drugs and drive buses too.

Good lord.

Posted by: Lee at February 20, 2008 12:45 PM

Since you know what's best for everyone, Lee, why don't we just give up our freedom of choice and let you decide everything for us?

Posted by: V the K at February 20, 2008 12:53 PM

As far as gay couples having a piece of paper - it is about very practical issues like hospital visitation, social security, inheritance, making medical decisions, and hundreds of other legal rights.

Posted by: Lee at February 20, 2008 12:56 PM

Why should I pay extra for health insurance

Please! You don't want to pay ANYTHING for health insurance! You'd rather the government provide for it at taxpayer expense!

Posted by: Crush Liberalism at February 20, 2008 12:58 PM

If the left-wing fascists would back-off on trying to micro-manage everything else in people's lives, I wouldn't give a crap about same-sex marriage. Even though I do think marriage should be treated as a holy covenant and not a pinata full of social benefits.

Posted by: V the K at February 20, 2008 1:10 PM

Hey, Mr. Anonymous Political Science Major, what do you think that the term "Nazi" stands for? Hint: its German for "Nationalsozialist". The translation is "member of the National Socialist Party". Hitler was not only a socialist, he was the quintessential socialist. Here's a fascinating link:

Hilter Was A Socialist

It's kind of long; hope you can handle it. They apparently didn't demand much in the way of reading skills from your college coursework. (In fact, if I were you, I think I'd demand my money back from the University that sold you that Political Science degree.)

Communists, socialists, fascists ... they're all the same except in some of the theoretical details. They forcibly impose what (they think) is for the good of the state upon the citizens of the state, even if it requires exterminating them by the millions to do so (which it often does).

Posted by: ent at February 20, 2008 1:14 PM

It's kind of a difference between how the right and left conceptualize the world. The right looks at concrete actions. "Fascism is a movement of the left because its ultimate goal is the absolute primacy of the state over the individual as evidence by a, b, and c..."

Whereas the left sees the world in emotions, symbols, and abstractions. "You can't call us fascists because we don't like that word and it hurts our feelers. You can't criticize Michelle Obama because it symbolically makes you a racist. Gay people need state recognition of their relationships because it will hurt their self-esteem if they don't have it."

Posted by: V the K at February 20, 2008 1:29 PM

"Fascism is a movement of the left"

That is an oxymoron. Such a concept is a full nonsense. Who says that, he does not know what is fascism nor what is left.

Posted by: carlos at February 20, 2008 1:56 PM

And carlos promptly shows up to prove my point.

Posted by: V the K at February 20, 2008 3:36 PM

You're right, V the K. Liberals think in terms of SYMBOLS instead of realities. "We don't goose-step, we don't wear the hammer and sickle! That means we're not fascist/communist." is their "logic".

A few years ago, there was a KKK rally here in Florida. A white man shouted insults at the closet nazis and they knocked him to the ground and started kicking him. A black woman threw herself on the man to protect him from the assault while the B*****Ds were dragged away.
The man who was aided by the woman was proudly wearing a CONFEDERATE FLAG on the back of his jacket at the time!

Posted by: KHarn at February 20, 2008 5:27 PM

I happened upon this interesting and relevant quote in a book that I'm reading...

"In recent years, however, the old apprehensions of the unforseen consequences of socialism have once more been strongly voiced from the most unexpected quarters. Observer after observer, in spite of the contrary expectation with which he approached the subject, has been impressed with the the extraordinary similarity in many respects under 'fascism' and 'communism'. While 'progressives' in England and elsewhere were still deluding themselves that comunism and fascism represented opposite poles, more and more people began to ask themselves whether these new tyrannies were not the outcome of the same tendencies."

Sounds awfully current, but the funny thing is that this was written by F.A. Hayek in "The Road to Serfdom" in the early 1940's, in the middle of WWII. So, this idea that communism/socialism/progressivism is the opposite of fascism and Nazism goes way back. It just goes to show how effective the leftist propaganda machine has been. We are still spouting crap like this, while America undergoes its socialization at an ever accelerating pace.

He continues...

Even communists must have been shaken by such testimonies as that of Max Eastman, Lenin's old friend, who found himself compelled to admit that "instead of being better, Stalinism is worse than fascism, more ruthless, barbarous, unjust, immoral, anti-democratic, unredeemed by any hope or scruple."

Posted by: ent at February 20, 2008 6:45 PM