Skip to comments.Piers Morgan: People Need Dictators and Slave Masters “Occasionally”
Posted on 03/13/2013 10:56:56 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Piers Morgan and New York Mayor Michael Bloombergs want to be dictators and slave masters. Regulating a person’s diet is the regulation of a person’s life. Here was Morgans response to a guest who disagreed with him on sugary drink control:
I think people need [these types of laws] occasionally, particularly on issues like smoking, drinking, guzzling sodas too big for them, you know, eating 16 Big Macs a day, whatever it may be, the reality is we all need a bit of nannying about that. Thats why so many people are on diets. Thats a form of nanny state.When governments pass laws that force people to eat a certain way in the name of this is good for you and society, they are not being nannies. They are being dictators and slave masters.
Once you go down the road of forced good intentions, there are no stop signs along the way. Today its sugary drinks; tomorrow dictators will want to tell us where to live, the jobs we should have, the friends we should associate with, how to spend our money, and what we can say.
In fact, weve already gone down this road. Watch what you say or youll be cited for hate speech. The money we earn is not really ours. When government dictators determine by law to exempt some of our income from taxation, thats a sure indicator that the government believes it can claim all our income. We could take it all, but weve decided to exempt some from taxation.
The Democrats have just proposed $1 trillion in new tax confiscation because they believe it’s their money to spend. We’re not capable of spending it in the right way.
Democrat Nancy Pelosi said: Tax cuts are spending. . . . They are called tax expenditures. Spending money on tax breaks. And thats the spending that we must curtail as well.
Taxation is never sold as being bad for anyone. Its always for the greater good. The same is true for laws governing speech that is said to make people uncomfortable or is defined as hateful.
How many times have we heard liberals pontificate over how they are pro-choice? One of the favorite pro-abortion slogans is, Our bodies, our lives, our right to decide!
Being pro-choice is only legitimate if a woman wants to kill her pre-born baby. But dont ever propose this slogan: Our bodies, our lives, our right to decide what to eat and drink!
Its one thing if well-concerned people put campaigns together to help people make good dietary choices. Im all for it, as long as (1) they pay for it, and (2) the government doesnt force anybody to comply.
There was a time when blacks were said not to be capable of freedom. They needed the security of slavery because they couldnt make the right choices on their own. Slavery was said to be necessary for them. Here are two examples of how slavery was often justified:
Piers Morgan and Mayor Michael Bloomberg would fit right in with the slavery arguments of the past. We need masters to force us to behave a certain way because some people arent capable of making good decisions as we see them. Slavery is alive and well in America, and it does by the name liberalism.
Whether anybody eats 15 Big Macs or not is clearly nobody’s business except the one doing the eating . . . we don’t need a nanny, and especially a foreigner, telling us what to do.
Yup peers moron. And some people need a boot up their ass from time to time. I would be glad to oblige you with my size 11. Jerk.
Piers Morgan is PROOF that we are letting the wrong people immigrate to the USA!
I prefer freedom, but if these idiots insist on a dictator, I plan putting a dictator in that will force my views on others. Isn’t that the way it works?
>>I think people need [these types of laws] occasionally, particularly on issues like smoking, drinking, guzzling sodas too big for them, you know, eating 16 Big Macs a day, whatever it may be, the reality is we all need a bit of nannying about that. Thats why so many people are on diets. Thats a form of nanny state.<<
Once again, John, there is NO WAY your satire can compete with reality.
Seriously, TSR, I thought this was another of John’s excellent satires (not that you tried on this one, I am making a point — point to follow on next sentence).
With liberals, it is IMPOSSIBLE to satirize beyond their reality!
This is the second time I have pinged JS on what could only be satire except it really happened!
I hope you don’t mind my pinging you John on these “damn, this ISN’T Satire?” threads...
Perhaps they do, Ms. Morgan. Just in case, we American citizens intend to stay armed and prepared to ensure we don't end up on the wrong side of such an arrangement.
"Those who beat their swords into plowshares, will pull them for those who did not."
>> prefer freedom, but if these idiots insist on a dictator, I plan putting a dictator in that will force my views on others. Isnt that the way it works?<<
As of 2008, yes.
Piers Morgan apparently supports Bloomturd’s soda ban.
Nanny State PING!
No human being ‘needs or deserves’ dictators or slave masters. See: the US Constitution.
However, if Pi$$ Morgan was trying to make a point that this despicable group of ‘nanny-staters’ will force citizens to be more protective of our rights - then let us pray we use this as a lesson in liberty.
Piers is a pompous footstool for The State. He makes being averagely stupid commendable, as he is degrees above those who are only stupid. He works at stupid the way Dale Carnegie worked at enunciation, brevity and clarity in addressing others. CPAC should start giving out Piers Awards to those MSM career toadies whose cheap, false and silly political stances are the most profoundly stupid. It could be a platinum statue of a prancing poodle on hind legs with forelegs lifted entreating a favored snack. The “Piers”.
I totally agree, so long as I get to be Piers’ nanny.
He thinks he’ll be on the dictating end of the equation,
not on the dictated TO end of the equation.
OK, submit to slavemasters. You first, Piers Moron!
Does any one recognize the Volstead Act? How about the 18th Amendment? Okay, how about Prohibition?
That was a real success wasn't it? You can travel from boarder to boarder and never encounter a can of beer or a bottle of booze on the shelves or bars in the nation. Right?
Slight less than 15 years after the nanny state forced this prohibition on alcohol the 18th Amendment was repealed by the 21st Amendment.
Does anyone really think that the human animal has undergone any radical evolutionary changes since January 16, 1919? I sure don't.
How ‘bout sexual activity Piers?
Gay men (and their rampant promiscuity) are their own worst enemy, and are more likely to die from HIV/Aids than almost any other cause.
Surely Piers, if you truly care about Gay men you would seek to limit their sexual activity - thus greatly prolonging their lives.
Yeah, if you want to talk about unhealthy behavior that needs to be regulated for their own good,
male homosexual sex would have to be near the top of that list.