Remember when taking candy from a baby was a cruel thing to do? When I Googled that phrase from yesteryear, this was the first picture that came up:

The photographer of the above aside, what sort of cruel person would take candy from a baby? I remember when that was a stereotype of the evil city slicker.

Now, taking sweet stuff away from children (as David Harsanyi points out) is the liberal thing to do. By means of more authoritarian legislation, of course:

As we speak, legislation is wiggling through Congress that would ban candy and sugary beverages in local schools -- bake sales, a la carte lunches, Halloween goodies, birthday cupcakes -- and stipulate that suitable chow be offered. It's legislation that can't be stopped. It's for the children.

Michelle Obama -- no doubt driven by the best of intentions -- went on to take food manufacturers to task, asking them to "rethink the products" they produce because business, apparently, should be a clearinghouse for ethically sound groceries rather than a place that manufactures frozen pizza.

The First Lady is also grumbling about access to supermarkets:

The first lady says there is a lack of "accessibility and affordability" as so many Americans reside in "nutritional wastelands" found in urban and rural areas (the latter, one gathers, filled with farms) with no access to supermarkets. "Some 23.5 million Americans -- including 6.5 million children -- currently live in food deserts," claims the Let's Move! site.

This fantasy quickly evaporates when one learns that the average American spends a mere 7 percent of his or her annual income on food (the lowest percentage in the world). That average person has an amazingly rich and diverse array of nutritious foods to choice from. In addition, it turns out that that there are very few "food deserts" in states that have the highest levels of obesity in the nation.

According to Harsanyi there's an authoritarian at the USDA who fancies himself the nation's Food Czar or something, and he scoffs at the idea of local control. He also wants to ban inappropriate commercials.

This week, I sat down in an editorial board meeting with Kevin Concannon, USDA Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services, a friendly and well-spoken authoritarian who effortlessly dismissed the idea of local parental and school control over kids. The problem is just too big, he explained.

Concannon did, however, speak enthusiastically about one day banning commercials that the administration found where simply inappropriate for kids to be watching -- like cereal ads. Too flashy. Too much sugar.

And if the advertising bans don't stop the children from liking sweet foods, the next logical stop ought to be restricting their sale to adults only!

Madness.

It would almost be funny except these sour people have the power to do whatever they want. I can't think of a better way to make the Republicans look sweet than for ordinary people to perceive Democrats as mean authoritarians who want to take away what their children love.

This sort of nonsense could make the victory even sweeter than what Dick Morris predicts. To quote the late Peter Jennings,

Imagine a nation full of uncontrolled two-year-old rage.

You may say that I'm a dreamer. But I'm not the only one...