Video: Nanny of the Month is …

posted at 3:21 pm on June 29, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

We need a palette cleanser this afternoon after a long week of intense debate over the reach of government and its intrusion on personal choice.  Hey, why not take a look at Reason TV’s Nanny of the Month, which highlights … government intrusion on personal choices?   Yeah, it’s kind of like drinking arsenic as a chaser to a hemlock highball, but it’s also a perfect way to end Congress Can Do Anything It Wants As Long As You Call It A Tax Week:

June’s busybodies want to shield your eyes from bikinis and remind you that they’re not above ripping your garden out (even if you are complying with city codes).

But top dishonors go to the police chief who admitted on camera that his officers had “more important things to do,” but still championed a measure that fines folks for swearing in public.

I laughed out loud about the last clip, which comes from the 1993 film Demolition Man, when Sandra Bullock was still struggling to get her name above the title and Sylvester Stallone was dissipating his box-office bankability.  For those who don’t remember, Stallone plays a cop stored for decades in cryogenic storage who has to get thawed out in order to chase a criminal who escaped cryogenic storage, because political correctness and the nanny state has rendered society completely incapable of defending itself.  Its IMDB rating of 6.4 is about two points too generous overall, but it does present an effective cautionary tale about political correctness leading to a fascism with a smiley face.

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Thanks HotAir,

you just started my weekend off right!

ToddPA on June 29, 2012 at 3:23 PM

Anybody see what Ed did there? He puts himself and Duane lined up with the bikini babe on the front page.

For shame, Ed. I thought Internet Voodoo was against the Blogger’s Universal Trade Tactics agreement.

MadisonConservative on June 29, 2012 at 3:26 PM

I’m sorry, but the nanny of the month is John Roberts. Maybe nanny of the century.

Axion on June 29, 2012 at 3:28 PM

Definite click-bait.

While I’m here, let me make this plug again on this thread:

Last week during the Wawa kerfuffle, someone proposed a get-together for Hot Air members in the Southeastern PA area. I’m posting this again for anyone interested. Looking forward to meeting some of you!

I’m seein’ all these Wawa fans, etc., that maybe somebody oughta set up a Hot Air meetup at a Wawa somewhere in southeast PA.

either orr on June 18, 2012 at 6:05 PM

How about Sunday, July 1, 10:00 AM for coffee, at this location near Kennett Square:

Store #8015
901 East Baltimore Pk.
E. Marlborough Twsp., PA 19348
(610) 388-6400

Any takers?

UltimateBob on June 29, 2012 at 3:28 PM

MadisonConservative on June 29, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Ed and Duane are on the front page?

TXUS on June 29, 2012 at 3:29 PM

No offense Ed, but I prefer looking at the bikini babe to you.

bw222 on June 29, 2012 at 3:29 PM

New Trend: Gyms Banning Slim Clients To Foster Comfort For Overweight Patrons

‘Humanity’ deserves to be hit by a big meteor. Just be on the side of the impact. The other side will die a horrific death.

Schadenfreude on June 29, 2012 at 3:30 PM

We need a palette cleanser this afternoon after a long week of intense debate over the reach of government and its intrusion on personal choice. Hey, why not take a look at Reason TV’s Nanny of the Month, which highlights

What Mr Ed wants to say :

Hye, I’m tired of being serious.
Watch this video because …look at the screen-cap dude ;-) ;-)

burrata on June 29, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Nanny in black robes, no doubt, the winner of the century.

Schadenfreude on June 29, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Sandra……hubba hubba

BobMbx on June 29, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Buy stocks in diapers and Depends.

Schadenfreude on June 29, 2012 at 3:33 PM

I’m seein’ all these Wawa fans, etc., that maybe somebody oughta set up a Hot Air meetup at a Wawa somewhere in southeast PA.

either orr on June 18, 2012 at 6:05 PM

How about Sunday, July 1, 10:00 AM for coffee, at this location near Kennett Square:

Store #8015
901 East Baltimore Pk.
E. Marlborough Twsp., PA 19348
(610) 388-6400

Any takers?

UltimateBob on June 29, 2012 at 3:28 PM

I would definitely be interested, but Sunday at 10 a.m. will
not work for me. Some other date, keep me in mind.

BTW, how far is Kennett Square from Lancaster??

ToddPA on June 29, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Should have spent more time on the boardwalk bikini controversy…because freedom need never sleep; jiggle maybe, sway a bit, perhaps tan…but never, never sleep.

Johnny Crow on June 29, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Uhh…ok..The ‘anti-swearing’ number one thing was ‘voted for’…

How’s that being Nanny State???

BigWyo on June 29, 2012 at 3:35 PM

What Mr Ed wants to say :

Hye, I’m tired of being serious.
Watch this video because …look at the screen-cap dude ;-) ;-)

burrata on June 29, 2012 at 3:31 PM

And … what’s your point? ;-)

Ed Morrissey on June 29, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Any takers?

UltimateBob on June 29, 2012 at 3:28 PM

I would definitely be interested, but Sunday at 10 a.m. will
not work for me. Some other date, keep me in mind.

BTW, how far is Kennett Square from Lancaster??

ToddPA on June 29, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Nevermind, I remember where it is, HA!

That’s no problem at all getting down there.

ToddPA on June 29, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Ed. :insert excited emoticon here: (no pun intended. really, it wasn’t)

Paul-Cincy on June 29, 2012 at 3:39 PM

Stallone plays a cop stored for decades in cryogenic storage who has to get thawed out in order to chase a criminal who escaped cryogenic storage

In other words, it’s a lamer version of Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery.

UltimateBob on June 29, 2012 at 3:40 PM

That’s no problem at all getting down there.

ToddPA on June 29, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Cool! Three was one other guy named AvgJoe (or something) who doesn’t comment here much, who said he’d be there on a motorcycle. I will too, so if you go, look for two guys on motorcycles who don’t seem to know each other. :-)

UltimateBob on June 29, 2012 at 3:43 PM

I do think swearing is offensive. (sorry, MadCon. Facts are facts)

Paul-Cincy on June 29, 2012 at 3:45 PM

I don’t know about this one. Vulgar speech hasn’t usually been considered protected. Banning it in public spaces? Maybe a little controlling, but it’s no worse than public smoking bans. Of course, I think Reason is pretty strongly against those, too, so maybe that’s not a helpful comparison.

redsweater on June 29, 2012 at 3:45 PM

I do think swearing is offensive. (sorry, MadCon. Facts are facts)

Paul-Cincy on June 29, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Hey, I don’t hold as invalid the view that profanity is offensive. I only dispute the desires some have to use government to silence what they find offensive.

MadisonConservative on June 29, 2012 at 3:47 PM

O_O

I don’t give a crap what the article is about.

Bishop on June 29, 2012 at 3:47 PM

I laughed out loud about the last clip, which comes from the 1993 film Demolition Man, when Sandra Bullock was still struggling to get her name above the title and Sylvester Stallone was dissipating his box-office bankability.

At least in the world of Demolition Man fines were not called taxes even if they were used as toilet paper sometimes.

MessesWithTexas on June 29, 2012 at 3:48 PM

I don’t know about this one. Vulgar speech hasn’t usually been considered protected. Banning it in public spaces? Maybe a little controlling, but it’s no worse than public smoking bans. Of course, I think Reason is pretty strongly against those, too, so maybe that’s not a helpful comparison.

redsweater on June 29, 2012 at 3:45 PM

I’m pretty sure Reason is against smoking bans only when they’re imposed by the government.

UltimateBob on June 29, 2012 at 3:49 PM

I swear, that’s one hot bikini chick. Worth the $20.

The Rogue Tomato on June 29, 2012 at 3:50 PM

And … what’s your point? ;-)

Ed Morrissey on June 29, 2012 at 3:37 PM

I think 0:30 says it perfectly, Ed

BlaxPac on June 29, 2012 at 3:52 PM

For some reason the song Good Lovin Gone Bad by
Bad Company going thru my head…..

ToddPA on June 29, 2012 at 3:55 PM

In other words, it’s a lamer version of Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery.

UltimateBob on June 29, 2012 at 3:40 PM | Delete | Delete and Ban

Actually, a pretty good movie. On the surface had some funny moments.
Deeper message was significant. Supported the need for ” rough men ready to visit violence…” and evil cannot be pacified belief.

Jabberwock on June 29, 2012 at 3:55 PM

Hey, I don’t hold as invalid the view that profanity is offensive. I only dispute the desires some have to use government to silence what they find offensive.

MadisonConservative on June 29, 2012 at 3:47 PM

Eff yeah, I agree with that! oops.

ToddPA on June 29, 2012 at 3:56 PM

Request: Can you use that pic for all future stories, please?

The Rogue Tomato on June 29, 2012 at 3:57 PM

I’m pretty sure Reason is against smoking bans only when they’re imposed by the government.

UltimateBob on June 29, 2012 at 3:49 PM

I’m not sure what that’s supposed to mean.

The government represents the people, and if this is what the people want…. I mean, this wasn’t a court ruling, nor a Bloomberg fiat. Feel free to tell the people it’s a bad idea. But we have public decency laws, and that seems reasonable to me. It’s an agreement to respect the rights and mores of others. If the people want to expand those to include language that they find indecent, I have a hard time getting riled up about that. But maybe it’s because I’m not a libertarian?

redsweater on June 29, 2012 at 4:05 PM

The government represents the people

redsweater on June 29, 2012 at 4:05 PM

I see the problem there…

The Rogue Tomato on June 29, 2012 at 4:10 PM

Heh. I’ve referenced Demoliton Man regarding future shock — or more exaclty, future disgust. So, yeah, I could see John Spartan looking at what’s been owtlawed in NYC and saying, “Somebody please put me back in the fridge.”

apostic on June 29, 2012 at 4:15 PM

*sigh* I share my opinions calmly, with little confidence, signalling that I’m willing to converse and even be persuaded, and all I get is condescending snark. Twice. You guys are doing a great job of winning people to your viewpoint. I’m done.

redsweater on June 29, 2012 at 4:16 PM

I don’t give a crap what the article is about.

Bishop on June 29, 2012 at 3:47 PM

There’s an article? ;-)

TXUS on June 29, 2012 at 4:17 PM

Request: Can you use that pic for all future stories, please?

The Rogue Tomato on June 29, 2012 at 3:57 PM

I second this, and add;

At the very least, please use that pic for all stories referencing:
Big Sis
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Nancy Pelosi
DWS

Hits will go up, I promise!

massrighty on June 29, 2012 at 4:17 PM

And … what’s your point? ;-)

Ed Morrissey on June 29, 2012 at 3:37 PM

My point is :
I need a palette cleanser this afternoon after a long week of intense debate over the reach of government and its intrusion on personal choice. Hey, why not show us some handsome dudes too ?? We girls need palatte cleansers too you know
:O

burrata on June 29, 2012 at 4:22 PM

apostic on June 29, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Strange. Something ate my hyperlink. Ah well….

apostic on June 29, 2012 at 4:24 PM

My point is :
I need a palette cleanser this afternoon after a long week of intense debate over the reach of government and its intrusion on personal choice. Hey, why not show us some handsome dudes too ?? We girls need palatte cleansers too you know
:O

burrata on June 29, 2012 at 4:22 PM

Problem is, if Ed gives the “girls” a palate cleanser in the form of “handsome dudes”, it would feed the trolls as well.

TXUS on June 29, 2012 at 4:28 PM

…I’m not going to come in here and read and comment…
…I’m going to just stare at the picture leading to the thread as if it was a screen saver!…oh…wait. . .*drooling*

KOOLAID2 on June 29, 2012 at 4:37 PM

New Trend: Gyms Banning Slim Clients To Foster Comfort For Overweight Patrons

‘Humanity’ deserves to be hit by a big meteor. Just be on the side of the impact. The other side will die a horrific death.

Schadenfreude on June 29, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Wow…it was the peer pressure that kept my fat behind on the treadmill for an hour a day until I was one of those slim people.

joekenha on June 29, 2012 at 4:41 PM

Problem is, if Ed gives the “girls” a palate cleanser in the form of “handsome dudes”, it would feed the trolls as well.

TXUS on June 29, 2012 at 4:28 PM

I thought their lotion suppliers had already provided the trolls with a list of approved handsome dudes—
Hussein, Barney Frank , John Roberts, Rachel Maddow …

burrata on June 29, 2012 at 4:41 PM

Ed,
I do believe that first paragraph was one of the funniest, wittiest pieces of text I’ve read in quite a while.
Thank you.
I love you.

shibumiglass on June 29, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Wha? Demolition Man is a great flick.

clearbluesky on June 29, 2012 at 4:45 PM

$20 for a swear word? Sounds like a tax…so…constitutional! See I can be Chief Justice too!

Also constitutional: a $10,000 tax on abortions to fund foster care. To make all those freeloaders pay up. Hey, no one got an abortion on their own. The government paid to train their doctor and pave the roads they drove on to get to the clinic. The government had the police forces and the fire forces and the Triforces…

xuyee on June 29, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Proof that Ed knows nothing about nothing!

Demolition Man was AWESOME.

:p

Dopavash on June 29, 2012 at 4:50 PM

I was afraid to post it first, but I agree with clearbluesky and Dopavash. Demolition Man was a fun movie. “You are fined one half credit for a sotto voce violation of the verbal morality statutes.” And how can we forget Associate Bob, dressed like a sofa? Or the scene with Benjamin Bratt and Sandra Bullock singing the Armour Hot Dog song? I just wish I could figure out how to use the three seashells…toilet paper is expensive.

HTL on June 29, 2012 at 5:07 PM

Agree wtih Dopavash & clearbluesky
I actually REMEMBER Demolition Man. That there says a lot about a movie. I’ll give it a 9.0!

kirkill on June 29, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Perfect end to the week?

She’s got a perfect end, indeed.

podank on June 29, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Obamacare to mandate the usage of the three seashells?

oryguncon on June 29, 2012 at 5:37 PM

Where’s the love for Demolition Man???? It was/is a great movie. It shows there really is good and bad. It has a liberal guy who creates a new super-PC perfect society where you have to live underground if you want your freedoms. And it shows that you need a red meat eating, gun shooting real man to save the day.

Free Indeed on June 29, 2012 at 5:40 PM

Maybe a little controlling, but it’s no worse than public smoking bans.

redsweater on June 29, 2012 at 3:45 PM

You don’t see people standing out in the rain cursing up a storm in the designated cussing area.

Happy Nomad on June 29, 2012 at 5:55 PM

I swear, that’s one hot bikini chick. Worth the $20.

The Rogue Tomato on June 29, 2012 at 3:50 PM

Amen. Spectacular … bikini.

Jaibones on June 29, 2012 at 6:31 PM

And … what’s your point? ;-)

Ed Morrissey on June 29, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Sooooo, any idea who that model is?

Daemonocracy on June 29, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Where’s the love for Demolition Man???? It was/is a great movie. It shows there really is good and bad. It has a liberal guy who creates a new super-PC perfect society where you have to live underground if you want your freedoms. And it shows that you need a red meat eating, gun shooting real man to save the day.

Free Indeed on June 29, 2012 at 5:40 PM

It’s a lot of fun, but just a little too cheesy. Verhoeven may be a lefty, but his over the top violence (satire on American taste or not) would have fit that film perfectly. And knowing that Dennis Leary is a Democrat partisan kind of ruins his characters rants against the nanny state in the film.

Daemonocracy on June 29, 2012 at 6:59 PM

*sigh* I share my opinions calmly, with little confidence, signalling that I’m willing to converse and even be persuaded, and all I get is condescending snark. Twice. You guys are doing a great job of winning people to your viewpoint. I’m done.

redsweater on June 29, 2012 at 4:16 PM

I suppose the notion didn’t occur to you that your opinions were offensive as well as just plain wrong. Contrary to the delusion you seem to be under, America most emphatically is not a Democracy. It is a Constitutional Republic. The People cannot just vote themselves any old damned thing they want. Vulgarity is, like it or not, constitutionally protected speech.

(Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15, 91 S. Ct. 1780, 29 L. Ed. 2d 284 [1971]). “One man’s vulgarity,” the Court said, “is another’s lyric,”

HotAir is not a Libertarian site, so the fact that you are not a Libertarian is completely irrelevant. Furthermore, what makes you think anyone believes you are willing to be persuaded? The fact that you saw both responses to your posting as condescending snark seems to belay that assertion. But hey, it’s ok, just don’t let the door hit ya you know where.

SWalker on June 29, 2012 at 7:12 PM

We girls need palatte cleansers too you know
:O

burrata on June 29, 2012 at 4:22 PM

A palate cleanser for the ladies should consist of pictures of shoes and pocket pistols… ;p

SWalker on June 29, 2012 at 7:15 PM

I do think swearing is offensive. (sorry, MadCon. Facts are facts)

Paul-Cincy on June 29, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Sure, but not even remotely as offensive as a law banning it.

Esthier on June 29, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Ed’s down on Demolition Man? That’s crazy! He probably doesn’t even know how to use the 3 shells.

CitizenEgg on June 29, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Profanity is annoying. However, it is also free speech. I think less of people when they swear (including myself), but it is inconceivable that a law can be successfully implemented forbidding it. This will get thrown out the minute somebody goes there, swears up a blue streak, and takes this town to court.

What’s next, fining you if you put up a political sign that 50% + 1 of the community doesn’t like? Not at all far-fetched. A few years ago, I actually had some “liberal” telling me that the political campaign sign that I displayed in my yard was offensive to the community and that they were entitled to tear it down.

HTL on June 29, 2012 at 8:15 PM

“Perfect End” to the week. Didn’t catch that until now…nicely done, Ed.

Jaibones on June 29, 2012 at 10:56 PM

I personally don’t mind people getting vulgar in public terribly much. Certainly not enough to request the Government to get involved and screw that up too. I merely offered to assist those with their filthy mouth problem PERSONALLY when they foolishly decided to use foul language in front of my pre-teen daughter.

For some unfathomable reason [unfathomable to the typical lazy American] that always solved that problem.

Those that can, do.

DannoJyd on June 30, 2012 at 12:09 AM

If the town residents support the law against swearing, they should have the right to pass it. If democracy means anything, it means the right of the majority to choose the kind of society they will live in and raise their families in, so long as they recognize basic rights. There are communities (liberal enclaves mostly) who impose speech standards that encourage obscenities as a symbol of their rejection of traditional standards and treat other words and phrases their majorities deem “hurtful” are taboo. As long as the left maintains such hypocritical standards, I’m all for a ban on obscenity and cursing. Personally, I consider profaning the name of deity as hurtful.

Bob Beckel keeps a “swear jar” in which he deposits money when he swears on the air. I don’t consider a $20 fine more significant than that. Besides, learning self-discipline isn’t a bad goal for anybody.

flataffect on June 30, 2012 at 1:11 AM

Palate cleanser, Ed.

Not palette.

fossten on June 30, 2012 at 6:45 AM