RedStateEclectic

Physicians and the Nanny State

Now I would be the last to suggest that too much TV and junk food for kids isn’t a problem.   But ultimately, the question is whether it’s a problem that parents ought to be dealing with, or whether it’s one that the state ought to be dealing with.

Pediatricians apparently believe that it’s a “federal issue”:

"It's all just a smokescreen anyway -- the big fast food corporations are basically interested in making money, not making good nutritional products," said Strasburger. "With billions of dollars in profits every year should come a sense of public health responsibility. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to."

McDonald's, which targets kids in much of its advertising, declined to comment.

In the meantime, Strasburger urges families to follow a few simple steps.

"Parents need to listen to the AAP guidelines which say, 'Limit your child to less than two hours of media time per day, keep the TV set and Internet out of the bedroom and avoid screen time in kids under two.'"

But cutting screen time alone isn't enough, according to Strasburger.

"We have to give kids healthy alternatives to being couch potatoes," he said. "The question is, how fat do we want people to become? Congress needs to think about that."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/06/27/us-doctors-ban-fast-food-ads-on-tv/#ixzz1QTxyd6Gw

I guess I’m getting too close to the end of Atlas Shrugged and have started reading the mindlessness of the masses into everything, but the last line of that article REALLY jumped out at me:  “The question is, how fat do we want people to become? Congress needs to think about that.”  CONGRESS needs to think about it?  Our overlords will now protect us? 

And then that first paragraph quoted—gracious, we’re supposed to believe that fast food restaurants shouldn’t be interested n making money?  And if you make money, you’re obliged to have a sense of “public health responsibility”?  In other words (as in Atlas), I guess you’re supposed give up making money in order to advance the idealistic goals of the overlords.

C’mon folks.  I understand the lure of fast food for kids—I’ve got an 8 year old who would eat every meal at Burger King or McDonalds (if I would let him)—primarily because of the kids’ meals toys, and the advertising of them on some of the channels that I occasionally let him watch (although he’s a bright kid, and can see the pictures as we drive by the restaurants, too—even without TV ads).  But PARENTS need to learn to say “no”, and quit expecting “someone else” to protect their kids.

And then there’s this: I get frustrated with the physicians (like Dr. Strasburger, quoted above), who are so willing to turn their patients’ well-being over the government.  Like the formally esteemed scientists in Atlas, who have become sycophants for the Feds, it seems to me that many of these physicians, well-intentioned though they may be, have contributed to the awful state that we’re in with respect to health care—where the free market is non-existent (except in specialty areas where insurance and the government doesn’t pay anything).

LLE

An Embarrassment of Riches

Nick Gillespie and Judge Napolitano talk about the strengths and weaknesses of the two libertarians in the race:

The rEVOLution Continues?

The RLC blog has a great post today, written by Jay Bailey, dealing with the potential for infighting between the Paul and Johnson camps.  Much food for thought in this Part 1 of what will be a 2 part article (I think):

So let us put this behind us. I thought this was a revolution. I’ve been seeing much more hate than love recently.

This is not the Ron Paul movement. It is not the Gary Johnson movement. This is the libertarian movement, and the more soldiers for liberty we have the more successful our fight will be.

I’m looking forward to Part 2.

People Are Cows

Jeffry Goldberg at The Atlantic has a two part series on his experience with the TSA scanners.

"People are cows," I say.
"What do you mean?"
"I mean they'll do whatever the federal government tells them to do," I say.
"How come you don't go through the machine?" he asks me.
I give him several more answers than he expected:
1) I prefer to limit my exposure to radiation, which the back-scatter imager produces;
2) I don't think this new technology will stop terrorism;
3) I find the idea of the government taking pictures of my genitalia a discomfiting invasion of privacy;
4) I find the specific pose a person is forced to take inside the machine -- hands up, as in a mugging -- particularly debasing.
"Okay," he says, "have a nice flight."

I think people may start to say “enough is enough.”  But maybe not soon enough.

 

LLE

The Fun Half

Reason Blog has a quick post on the nature of the Tea Party:

If the Tea Party seems schizo—what with all of the "Get Government Out of My Medicare" business—that's because it's a house divided. Or at least a lean-to partitioned by a sheet strung on a clothesline. The traditional conservatism of half the crowd is easier for outsiders to grasp, and easier to capture in polls. But buried in the crowd are findings like this one, which reveal something else is going on in the ranks besides the same old conservative Republican ticked-offness:

When asked whether the Republican or Democratic Party has the best ideas to fix government, 80 percent of tea party libertarians said “neither can be trusted,” compared to 64 percent of conservatives.

Targeting Small Businesses

Cute way to bring awareness of a stupid law.

HT: Eric Larson’s Facebook page!

Where do libertarians Belong?

 

Discussions worth having, I think.

Judge Nap: Bush and Cheney Should Have Been Indicted

Ralph Nader and Judge Andrew Napolitano chat about the Constitution and “Lies the Government Told You” (Napolitano’s great book). 

“Couldn’t Sell Ice Water in a Desert”

Michael Badnarik’s speech to the libertarian Party this year.

“Rude ad hominem attacks.”  “Libertarians are lazy.”  “There is no silver bullet.” 

  Same guy’s video, Part 2.

The Real Right

The Southern Avenger strikes again!