Second-Degree Glibertarianism

« September 2014 »

Memo to glibertarian shitheads: THERE ARE NO FOOD POLICE.

Apparently, to America's glibertarian hordes, "freedom" doesn't mean freedom from being spied on in the name of fighting terrorism. It means freedom from anyone, anywhere, suggesting to you that maybe you should eat a fucking plant every now and then.

You will be forgiven if the horror that is "S'Moresgate" has passed you by. It's a fleeting flicker in the average newsfeed. You see, the governmental nanny state is out to ruin your camping, but luckily, Fox News and Republican congressmen are on the case.

You see, earlier this year, the USDA put an article up on its website with some possible replacement for the ingredients in the classic s'more in case people want to cut their calorie intake or adjust the amount of sugar flowing into their kids' mouths. Note the IN CASE. Suggestions included fruit instead of chocolate, or angel food cake instead of graham crackers, or controllable amounts of marshmallow fluff instead of trying to subdivide marshmallows.

I throw the term around a lot, but I may have never properly explained the difference between a libertarian and a glibertarian. A true libertarian would look at this, see that individuals are being provided with information and suggestions that they can do with as they choose, and move along. There are very few of these people out there.

A glibertarian, like Todd Starnes, however, is a fucking child who throws a fucking tantrum every time he thinks SOMEONE IS TELLING ME WHAT TO DO, even though he's not the intended audience and they're only telling him what he could do anyway. ACTUAL QUOTE TIME!

"I really wish the Obama administration would stop being such killjoys. What’s next? Will the USDA recommend we roast tofu hot dogs? Will the EPA ban the baking of beans over methane gas emissions? Will OSHA mandate that campfire cooks wear fire-retardant aprons? Will U.S. Fish & Wildlife ban the hunting of snipes?" - Starnes, on Fox News' website.

I do appreciate Starnes' correct use of the term "killjoy", instead of the far more common feeling he gets in his loins whenever we bomb brown people, but what a fucking baby.

They might recommend tofu dogs. To people trying to cut back on meat or fat in their diets. And you know what? That's a perfectly good suggestion. It's a fucking hot dog. If you cared what was inside of it, you wouldn't be eating it in the first place. All you care about is that it tastes vaguely of hot dog and has ketchup on it. They won't turn you gay.

We will ignore the obvious fart joke because we don't want to disabuse Todd Starnes of the notion that he is clever - the realization might kill him. But note that we move very quickly from "suggest" into "ban" and "mandate" as if those naturally followed down the slippery slope from helpful suggestions. Although Todd Starnes' affinity for the freedom to set ourselves on fire should be noted, as it appears to be a recurring theme:

“'Use a roasting stick of at least 30 inches in length,' the Forest Service said. You’ve been warned, America. So don’t be surprised if a park ranger shows up at your camp site with a measuring stick." - Starnes, misrepresenting a blog-post as "government-mandated directions".

Remember, kids. Using tear gas to make sure high-melanin citizens don't stand in the street when you don't want them to is not governmental overreach, but a recommendation that you stand an arm's length away from a roaring fire is TOO MUCH. If Todd Starnes wants to roast his full-fat, full-sugar s'mores on a pencil, so that the smoke from his singed arm hairs enhances the flavor, who are you to gently suggest to him that his idea may be shitty? Go away, nanny state, and let Todd Starnes stick his hand in fire!

Actually, when I phrase it in that specific way, the glibertarian philosophy does have a certain visceral appeal to it.