« High calorie, low healthy eating at the White House |
| When Farrakhan talks, Father Pfleger listens »
February 28, 2012
Is Paula Deen Surrendering to the Food Police?
Paula Deen says she's going to start making lighter versions of her dishes. That's a little like Ron Paul saying he's going to start putting tax increases in his bills. It's a little suspect.
Paula Deen has made a fortune off her rich recipes, as has the Food Network. So, what's really at play here?
Deen, of course, has been under fire ever since revealing last month she has Type 2 diabetes.
Food activists decried the revelation. After all, how dare she keep mum about it for three years and continue making fattening foods!
What she cooks, eats, and what medical problems she has are no one else's business. But, try telling that to the food police who think others' food choices are their business.
Neither Deen nor the Food Network should bow to outside pressure for healthier fare. It's a slippery slope toward food tyranny. What's next, government regulation of the Food Network? Big Brother is already trying to tell us what we can and can't eat, why not tell the Food Network what to do?
Deen is just one of a slew of popular personalities at the network serving up delicious, fattening fare. Have you tried her Deep Fried Mac and Cheese? The Barefoot Contessa's Outrageous Brownies? Rachael Ray's Swiss and Bacon Dip?
Absolutely scrumptious -- and, of course, bad for you.
Surely, the government will step in to "protect" us from these foul temptresses. Bureaucrats, emboldened with statistics from the Center for Science in the Public Interest, will certainly try to alter the content of our favorite cooking shows.
I can see it now: government warnings for programs like "Outrageous Food" - which features, in its own words, "heart-stopping" fare. The warnings will be graphic, much like with cigarettes, showing pictures of fatty hearts, and people in power chairs or bedridden because of their obesity. The government will demand crawls at the bottom of the screen for shows like "Diners, Drive-ins and Dives," showing the hosts' weight, triglyceride and cholesterol levels. The network will be forced to provide the calorie and fat content of every recipe shown.
Only late at night, after kids have gone to bed, could shows like "Cupcake Wars" air.
After all, it would be irresponsible to do otherwise.
The government will say we shouldn't be heralding or holding up as role models the overweight and the obese. The hosts shouldn't be looked at as culinary heroes when obesity-related illnesses cost the country $147 billion a year.
But, we have to ask ourselves: Do we want a nanny state or one that safeguards our individual liberty?
Ronald Reagan once told an interviewer, "I don't believe in a government that protects us from ourselves." He says it might be stupid to do things like ride a motorcycle without a helmet. But, he says, "That's one of our sacred rights - to be stupid."
Same goes for our diets.
So, if Paula Deen wants to showcase her Lady's Brunch Burger, which consists of a beef patty, bacon and fried egg between two glazed doughnuts, more power to her.
Thomas Lifson adds:
Michelle Obama certainly isn't surrendering to the Food Police. Feeling no obligation to practice what she preaches, the first lady wowed the collected governors and spouses of the states at dinner last Friday. The Daily Mail:
The first lady also indulged her taste for designer clothing to breathless praise::
Recession? What recession?
It continually amazes me that Michelle Obama believes she can flaunt her own guidelines, and carry on like Marie Antionette. Of course, she has the media on her side, so it takes a Brit paper and a conservative website to bring the story to you here. On the other hand, this is a form of body language, and the human mind absorbs such information unconsciously, and the behavor is so frequent and blatant that it registers.
FOLLOW US ON