Reason TV: Nanny of the Year
posted at 3:35 pm on December 28, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
This won’t surprise anyone who has watched Mayor Michael Bloomberg conduct his crusades against cigarette smoking and fat in New York City. Nick Gillespie of Reason TV names Bloomberg the Nanny of the Year for erecting a nanny state in America’s most populous city. No one has done more to insinuate the long arm of government into the private choices of Americans, not even Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid — and that’s saying something indeed:
Bloomberg’s success will encourage other nosy politicians to grab enough power to start dictating personal choices in cities across America. Make no mistake about it — the Big Apple will be the Big Precedent. And once ObamaCare turns into single payer, the feds will have the leverage they need to do the same.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
We need a war on Nanny Mayors, Senators, Representatives, and especially a war on the Nanny-in-Chief.
anXdem on December 28, 2009 at 3:41 PM
Mayor Michael Nanny-Nanny-Boo-Boo-Bloomberg is the current chief reason as to why I would rather spend a full week in the front row of Barry Manilow’s Las Vegas Show, chewing on a roll of aluminum foil and having my bare feet immersed in a bucket full of live crabs before I would so much as venture within the city limits of New York.
pilamaye on December 28, 2009 at 3:42 PM
SoCons, and therefore the Republican Party at large, do a pretty job of it as well.
Legislating morality = Nanny Statism, period. And it ain’t Democrats trying to control or ban “bad” behavior.
jjraines on December 28, 2009 at 3:43 PM
It sounds like Bloomberg has an undiagnosed, overdeveloped case of OCD.
tru2tx on December 28, 2009 at 3:45 PM
He never should have been allowed to run for a 3rd term.
BadgerHawk on December 28, 2009 at 3:46 PM
What kind of morality do the Republicans try to legislate?
I’ll give you the gay marriage point, but please, try to substantively list some others.
BadgerHawk on December 28, 2009 at 3:47 PM
Delusional, are we?
lorien1973 on December 28, 2009 at 3:48 PM
Upstate isn’t as bad as the City, but Nanniness is fairly ubiquitous throughout New York State.
anXdem on December 28, 2009 at 3:48 PM
Liberals pass all these ninny, feel good laws so they can thump their chest and proclaim “Golly, we’ve helped so many people!!! We’ve done our good deed for the day.”.
That’s almost tolerable.
It really, really hurts though when someone like Bloomberg comes along and starts actually enforcing these silly laws.
No smoking ordinances, mandatory seat belts, mandatory helmets for bike riders (this one really chaps my you-know-what), etc., etc.
BowHuntingTexas on December 28, 2009 at 3:49 PM
I was rooting for him to lose…it was close.
SouthernGent on December 28, 2009 at 3:49 PM
Oh yeah? Let’s start with politically correct speech codes and countless attempts at gun control that have been found by the Supreme Court to violate the 2nd Amendment.
cool breeze on December 28, 2009 at 3:50 PM
He also did a good job of ending term limits there. He is the ultimate Socialist, in my opinion. He’s there for life if he has anything to say about it. Couldn’t let Rudy stay in longer than his term even though the city was in ruins, etc. etc., however, Bloomberg can stay because well, he just wants to.
NJ Red on December 28, 2009 at 3:50 PM
Glad you asked. For the record, I’m not talking about gay marriage.
More along the lines of: online poker … and other “sins” like drinking, smoking, strip clubs, mild drugs, and other gambling.
If Repubs/conservatives were actually consistent with their policies, most would believe (and join) them in the cause of liberty and limited government.
But unfortunately socons (read: the Rep party and most ‘conservatives’) are all for personal responsibility and liberty … except when they aren’t. Kinda like how libs support free speech — only when they like what they hear.
jjraines on December 28, 2009 at 3:51 PM
Nanniness is about absolute control, and absolute control is a Liberal trademark.
anXdem on December 28, 2009 at 3:52 PM
New Yorkers voted him in. They can live with the consequences of their choice.
NeoKong on December 28, 2009 at 3:53 PM
And if a state bans gay marriage. How are the daily lives of a gay couples affected?
The only “benefits” denied gay couples result from other laws government(s) create. Gays would a find a much broader audience to their “cause” if they teamed up with limited government activities (like that group that is going to be at CPAC).
WashJeff on December 28, 2009 at 3:53 PM
Also: prayer/religion in school.
Would socons be gungho about a “moral majority” if majority was muslim, and wanted to institute prayers to Allah and studies of the Koran? Otherwise I don’t see how a state-enforced promotion of Christianity is in line with the Founding principles these same people ostensibly support.
jjraines on December 28, 2009 at 3:56 PM
I agree with this, though if you listed the 20 most talked about political issues, gay marriage would rate 20th on ones I actually cared about. My only issue is courts or the federal government trying to force a position.
BadgerHawk on December 28, 2009 at 4:04 PM
Maybe I missed something over the holidays, but I didn’t realize the GOP was trying to force people to pray in schools.
BadgerHawk on December 28, 2009 at 4:06 PM
Agreed. I don’t get bent out of shape either of a city like New York wants to be a Nanny to its citizens. If the people of NY do not like it, move. I would, though, try to stop my city\town from being a Nanny. When the Nanny-sh*t comes from the feds and there is no where to go…
WashJeff on December 28, 2009 at 4:06 PM
online poker – I’ll give you that one
drinking – legal
smoking – still legal, but it’s liberals that want to get rid of it.
strip clubs – legal
other gambling – Right. Cause you can’t find a lottery or a casino anywhere /sarc
State-enforced? If some school puts on a Christmas show and neglects to include a religious Christmas carol, the police show up and send the music teacher to jail?
Bobbertsan on December 28, 2009 at 4:07 PM
Get yourselves ready, or fight.
Schadenfreude on December 28, 2009 at 4:08 PM
Are you really denying that conservatives don’t dream aloud of how great it would be to have prayer and bible study in public schools?
jjraines on December 28, 2009 at 4:10 PM
Are you smoking something today? Quick – name 3 prominent conservatives you heard/read saying anything remotely like that, and provide a link to it, please.
Midas on December 28, 2009 at 4:12 PM
I dream that public schools would cease to exist and parents could choose schools freely. Even one that does have time for prayers.
On this web-site, most commentators would just like to have that decision exists with the local school board and not have higher level of governments overrule local control.
WashJeff on December 28, 2009 at 4:13 PM
Yep. If one state decides to get insane I can move. When the federal government does it I have nowhere to go.
Name a couple Senators sponsoring bills that would legislate bible study in public schools.
And watch out for those windmills.
BadgerHawk on December 28, 2009 at 4:16 PM
Oh please, was it Conservatives yapping about Joe Camel? Trans-fats, global warming, nuclear power, anti-profiling, cafe standards, gun control and these are just the beginning. If liberals remain in power you will be able to gamble on-line in you size prescribed home, in the prescribed neighborhood, you’ll be luck to own a car because you will work near your job. But that’s after they find out how to tax and regulate where you can go on the internet. Name a state that doesn’t have a lottery. Mississippi recovered from Katrina thanks to a pretty prosperous gambling area.
Cindy Munford on December 28, 2009 at 4:17 PM
Heh. We could make a whole new “We didn’t start the fire” on the things the left tries to legislate in our daily lives.
BadgerHawk on December 28, 2009 at 4:20 PM
jjraines, you forget that if a majority were fundamentalist Muslim, there would be nothing allowed EXCEPT Muslim teachings in school. We have Muslim principles, Native American beliefs, Hinduism and others being taught in comparative religion classes. Under strict Islam women can not be educated. Under strict Islam we have seen women who were raped be executed for “bringing it on themselves”. Muhammad was considered merciful for letting a pregnant adulteress live until her baby had been weaned. Compare that with the Christ’s actions and figure out which set of faithful followers would be better to have setting the course of a government.
You are trying to make two sets of morays equivalent which are not equivalent and setting up a straw man argument.
Second the state is not enforcing Christianity. Where is the “Church of the United States” in any of these proposed laws?
Take a peek at state constitutions and see how many of them say they derive their authorities from an Almighty God. Heck, take a look at the opening statements of the Declaration of Independence to see where the founders thought we derived our rights. Whether or not you like it, religious morays bring about social morays as well as the rise and fall of governments. And yes both secular humanism and atheism are religions.
Duncan Khuver on December 28, 2009 at 4:21 PM
I think most of the liberals in N.Y. think that they are paying for services rendered and those who don’t like it they have moved. Living in status symbol land is obviously worth the price to them.
Cindy Munford on December 28, 2009 at 4:21 PM
Ugh!
A Do-Gooder Busy Body!
canopfor on December 28, 2009 at 4:21 PM
He is just getting started, that article could have been encyclopedic in size.
fourdeucer on December 28, 2009 at 4:24 PM
And if there were christian prayer in school that be a bad thing because of all the bad influence that Jesus has had on how to live life.
royzer on December 28, 2009 at 4:26 PM
Great idea, lol.
Midas on December 28, 2009 at 4:26 PM
Enemys outside,enemys inside,and enemys at the gate!
canopfor on December 28, 2009 at 4:26 PM
Same old tired trick they pull on a daily basis, blame the Right for all the things they as working their a$$es to impose on the country. I’d like to say it doesn’t work but we know that their willing mouth pieces are blind to the hypocrisy. After all it’s for the chilllddreen.
Cindy Munford on December 28, 2009 at 4:26 PM
And to whoever it was claiming that the GOP is regulating against gaming…
Um, I lived in the Peoples’ Socialist Republic of Maryland–long a Democratic stronghold, by hook & mostly crook–for over 10 years. It was the DEMOCRATS who have consistently shot down any attempts at gaming machines at the horse racing tracks. The racing industry is rapidly dying in Maryland, even the Belmont track, & Republicans thought putting slot machines into the racetracks would help keep it alive. It’s consistently been the nanny-state DEMS who have fought the legislation. Nice work, too–most tracks around the DC area have long since died off & the action gone to West Virginia.
If you bother to look past your ideology, you’ll also see that it has been DEMOCRATS in many states that resisted state lotteries (Maryland again, NY for awhile).
One minor quibble for the person who said the GOP regulated against gay marriage. If you look, in every state that has allowed a vote, the majority have voted against gay marriage–even in California. That’s why the District of Columbia government won’t allow a popular vote on gay marriage. Just like the donkeys in Congress, they’re going against the wishes of the majority of their constituents & in this case put gay marriage in place. DC is overwhelmingly black & Democrat, but I guarantee you the majority of them oppose gay marriage. That’s not the GOP regulating morality.
Kittymama on December 28, 2009 at 4:29 PM
BTW Not saying Bloomberg is correct in his actions, personally think he is wrong and am very grateful I don’t live in NYC, just didn’t like the “what if the muslims were in control” argument.
Duncan Khuver on December 28, 2009 at 4:29 PM
Ministry of All Things that Should Be,Could Be,and If
Allowed Will Be,
Czar of Ministry Of All Knowing!!
canopfor on December 28, 2009 at 4:30 PM
I didn’t say leftists are any better (they are far worse). That doesn’t excuse the contradicting policies of conservatives, and the official platform of the Republican Party — which generally sides with enforcing morality through the strong arm of the state.
Ask any man on the street “Which party favors personal freedom more, Republicans or Democrats?” I guarantee you Democrats would win, because of the Republican image of stodgy old white guys trying to control “sinful” behaviors.
That would not be the case of Reps/cons were consistent and actually practiced what they preached. Guess what:Supporting limited government and personal responsibility means accepting behaviors and actions you don’t always like.
If someone wants to gamble their life away, it’s not your or the government’s job to tell them they can’t. Same with smoking, drugs, porn, sex, and everything else Republicans find so “destructive towards society.” Maybe, so what? Freedom works both ways.
jjraines on December 28, 2009 at 4:31 PM
Don’t even need examples; it’s just something people believe. I knew a lot of (protestant) busy-bodies, too. Funny thing, though…they were all Dems.
VerbumSap on December 28, 2009 at 4:39 PM
I would further guess that “any man on the street” could not name one law the the GOP or Conservative leaders advocate at the federal level that would control their daily lives. They would sure guess at some. The MSM has done a greate job of painting conservatives as wanting to control lives, but as you mentioned, the “liberals” are “much worse.”
WashJeff on December 28, 2009 at 4:40 PM
Of course they would, that’s what they are spoon fed constantly and they are too stupid to realize that there is more to their freedoms then where they stick their johnsons and all other majorly important recreational pursuits.
Cindy Munford on December 28, 2009 at 4:43 PM
And what ideology would that be? I’m a conservative; just one that understands liberty also extends to ‘unsavory’ choices as well.
Which is my point — if we were consistent and didn’t let the Huckabees of the world define who we are — then we’d be an unstoppable force in American politics. Conservatism WOULD win out.
Unfortunately, religion trumps all for most of the base, who don’t know the first thing about freedom. Their hypocrisy, contradictions, and nanny-state/theocrat tendencies keep many people away, and embarrass actual conservatives like me.
jjraines on December 28, 2009 at 4:44 PM
Of course you fail to realize that if you stopped sticking your nose into where they put their johnsons we would have an easier time getting them to our side.
LevStrauss on December 28, 2009 at 4:47 PM
Religion trumped all for the founding fathers too. You are setting up a false dilemma though, one can be a Christian and a conservative as the two go hand in hand. When God ran the government with the children of Israel it was a small, decentralized, locally controlled government. When the people demanded a king just like the other peoples of the region, God warned them not to go that direction. In other words, He tried to steer them clear of a strong central government.
Mojave Mark on December 28, 2009 at 4:51 PM
What was god’s position on raping the help? Because the guys who wrote those documents didn’t seem to think that those actions would bring about the collapse of society. What year did god come around to find slavery in general abhorrent?
LevStrauss on December 28, 2009 at 4:51 PM
My faith guides my life and the only time you will hear me discuss it is when the Left tries to suppress my beliefs while promoting others as more legitimate. You are keying on the few and granting them power they do not possess except for the purposes of propaganda.
Cindy Munford on December 28, 2009 at 4:52 PM
I do not think the social issue conservatives will be leading the charge the next few years in reality. Though, I fully expect the MSM to exagerate the importance\influence of this portion of the conservative base has in the current environment to “scare” other people.
I think there are many limited government GOP leaders out there, but it does not fit the MSM template for the GOP, so they are ignored.
WashJeff on December 28, 2009 at 4:52 PM
But I don’t do that, nor do the vast majority of conservatives. As usual, the Left uses the few to create fears. They live on the quivering anxiety of people who are subsidized by the taxpayer dollars to be leeches on society.
Cindy Munford on December 28, 2009 at 4:55 PM
Most great people, being human, have made mistakes or have incorrect facts due to the times in which they lived. Are the totality of their lives to be discounted and maligned?
Cindy Munford on December 28, 2009 at 4:58 PM
You agreed with WashJeff that the MSM has done a very good job of painting the GOP in a way that is not consistent with reality, then go right back into bashing ‘socons’. If you’re a regular reader here you’ll notice that most of the readers on this site are both Christian and can’t stand Huckabee.
You’re tilting at windmills and missing the lager point.
BadgerHawk on December 28, 2009 at 5:13 PM
Unfortunately, religion trumps all for most of the base, who don’t know the first thing about freedom. Their hypocrisy, contradictions, and nanny-state/theocrat tendencies keep many people away, and embarrass actual conservatives like me. jjraines on December 28, 2009 at 4:44 PM
Ah, I smell a LOSERTARIAN here. Not Conservative. I’m sure you’d just loooovve it if a yob lived next to you and did all the things you listed Conservatives hate (smoking, drinking, drugging, gambling and hot, hot strippers in and out of his/ her house all day and night). Look at your own hypocrisy, Losertarian!
Gob on December 28, 2009 at 5:35 PM
Of course you fail to realize that if you stopped sticking your nose into where they put their johnsons we would have an easier time getting them to our side.
LevStrauss on December 28, 2009 at 4:47 PM
I’m so sure you reserve the right to stick YOUR OWN stickybeak into certain behaviours (such as those you are admonishing others of doing) if say the peeps were working for YOU or lived next door to YOU. The false Libertarian schtick only gets one so far and you know it…but I guess you represent “All Animals Are Equal…But Some Animals are MORE Equal Than Others”.
Gob on December 28, 2009 at 5:41 PM
Sorry..but, I call Bullsh!t.
What positions do you hold are farther removed from lib/dems than they are from repubs?
You need to be more subtle in your bullcrap at first..it would be more believable imo.
Just trying to help.
Itchee Dryback on December 28, 2009 at 5:58 PM
Your argument makes no sense. Democrats don’t practice what they preach, and you even say they favor freedom much less than Republicans, yet according to you, the “man on the street” believes they are the party of freedom despite doing the very things you claim keeps Republicans from being the party of freedom. You’ve basically undermined your own argument.
xblade on December 28, 2009 at 6:02 PM
Sure, that’s why Democrats in my state pushed through a statewide smoking ban in restaurants and bars this year that goes into effect on January 2….because they’re not trying to control or ban “bad” behavior, lol.
xblade on December 28, 2009 at 6:08 PM
Hey Bloomberg: MYOFB.
Chaz706 on December 28, 2009 at 6:29 PM
Surprised reason didn’t even mention the gun-grabbing.
bikermailman on December 28, 2009 at 7:24 PM
Govt takeover of health care will give the Nanny staters more authority to dictate our lifestyle choices. All in the name of controlling health care costs.
MarkTheGreat on December 29, 2009 at 10:08 AM