Blubbery, chubby food fanatic Jamie Oliver has decided to lambast the government because they won't bring in the laws he wants. Welcome to the land of disappointment, Jamie, where most people just wish this government would stop making up more petty and spiteful laws and guess what - they aren't listening to us either.
Longrider has already laughed in the face of Jamie's latest little tantrum but it's worth another go because there's another side to it that Jamie himself is far too dim to grasp.
The chef who's fatter than anything he's ever roasted wants more and harder controls on what we eat. To stop 'obesity', even though he fails to explain how taxing my food makes someone else slimmer. In a rare outbreak of common sense, the Government Monster in charge of Eating has told him to stuff his ideas where used food emerges. It's none of the Government's business what, or how much, any of us eat and it's refreshing to see that at least one Monster realises that.
Oh, but Little Jamie isn't happy. So he's lying on the floor screaming and banging his fists again. It's not hard to see why. They let his pals in Tobacco Control have what they wanted. They're letting his pals in Alcohol Control and Salt Control and all the other controls have what they want. All Jamie wants to do is hurt fat people, and thin ones too while he's at it. Jamie isn't getting to play Dictator like all his pals and now he's all weepy and upset. He thinks it's his turn to tell the Government what to do and why shouldn't he get a turn? Every other pointless, opinionated, self-important little prick has had a go and the Government have been even more accommodating than a whore with rickets to all of them.
The story fisks itself. Jamie insists that not demanding to control every morsel we eat is patronising, but if the Government does as they're told and forces us to eat as if we were all still in high chairs, that would not be patronising. Irony is not Jamie's strong point.
Quite what he thinks a chef will do in a world where nobody eats pre-prepared food is another mystery. Best not tax his intellect with that one, it's already at breaking point.
Comments on the Grauniad article include -
EllisWyatt - How about good old fashioned bullying until people shed a few stone -
more laughing at and not with James Corden could be a start.....
Not enough smokers around for you these days, Ellis? A Mr. Hitler called - he wants to know if you're still interested in that job as shower supervisor. Here's an idea, Ellis - How about you engage in a bit of good old fashioned dropping dead?
JonMichael - It is in everyone's interest that the country eats right and eats less.
Tax what is bad more and pass the credits to fresh food. Fast food is
bad and fast. Acting against cigarettes will have a postive impact on
health and reduce the effective tax that we all pay for treating the
ill-health of smokers. Fast Food is the same.
It is in nobody's interest that the country becomes a place where everyone wears grey overalls and queues for gruel at the local Government feeding station. Fast food is like smoking only in that if you don't want it, you aren't forced to buy it. If you think the NHS is costing you too much, campaign to shut it down. Then you can't be paying for other people's health care, can you? Oh, and if you think tax will reduce as a result of this, ask yourself how much tax has been reduced since the smoking ban. Which, despite its use as a comparison here, has only made health worse.
It's even more depressing over at the Daily Shriek:
What none of the commenters realise, and what the Man with the Infant Head doesn't realise, is where such banstrubation leads. As with the increasing control on alcohol leading to more and more dodgy distillations, the clampdown on tobacco leading to a boom in business for Man with a Van, soon there'll be Sugar Gangs hanging around school gates, competing with the drug pushers.
It also leads naturally into more controls in your home, Fridge Inspectors, Waistline Co-Ordinators and Jam Sandwich Extermination Squads. Actually, many schools already have those. Councils are already loading up with Walk-More Officers complete with their own Council transport and luncheon vouchers.
Next it will be illegal to make your own jam or chutney and there'll be a mandatory five-year sentence for possession of a frying pan. Ten for a chip pan or deep-fat fryer. If they find lard in your fridge, they'll execute you on the spot. For the cheeeeldren.
Then it will be illegal to grow any fruit that contains sugar (that's all of it) because that prevents the Fat Police controlling your sugar intake.
Therefore, the only place you will be able to get food is the supermarket. No making your own, no growing your own, just buy your ration every week and that's it.
Explain why supermarkets would put up any resistance at all to that scenario?
Jamie Oliver is leading us into a world where we have to pay for all our food and anyone trying to not pay by growing their own will be punished.
The only logical conclusion is that Jamie is in the pay of Big Food. He is doing his best to boost their profits and force everyone into captive customers.
Logic is fun, isn't it?