"Where have all our heavyweight snobs gone?"

Asks Camilla Long in the London Times. 

I’m not sure I can survive on Keir Starmer secretly blanching at the thought of “thick” Angela Rayner’s vulgar wardrobe, a collection of vegan-friendly “stomper” boots and leopard-print that she wore on campaigns. Why didn’t he just tell her her clothes looked as though they’d been rescued from a flash fire in a Sicilian brothel, before giving the seditious moaner the boot?

I don't know who these people are, but I like the general idea of harsher, meaner insults aimed at powerful individuals. I looked up Angela Rayner and I'm more confused and amused, because she is — according to Wikipedia — "Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work... and Shadow First Secretary of State, Deputy Leader of the Opposition and Deputy Leader of the Labour Part." 

Back to Long:

Is there anything more snobby than two Labour MPs demanding a northern seat be served by a “working-class” candidate who is also preferably a key worker from the local area, as they did last week? What else do they want? For the candidate to be gay, female, a retired miner, a ferret-loving “local hero” and salt-of-the-earth sharpshooter who won’t tell Starmer he’s a prat, a gender-fluid teen mum?

Long links to this Times article from a few days ago: "Are you posh? I might be, according to this list/A new survey reveals age-old clichés about how the other half supposedly lives." There are 40 items on the list, including calling your parents "Mummy and Daddy" (when you are an adult), calling dinner “supper,” calling everyone “darling,” calling champagne “champers,” having shelves full of books, saying “napkin” instead of “serviette,” and laughing very loudly. 

We Americans are in no danger of calling a napkin a "serviette," so if we cared about seeming "posh" — we don't — we could get a head start on that laughing very loudly. Darling.

"Under the new junk food controls, people will be rewarded with shopping vouchers for losing weight and exercising more under a 'fit miles' incentive scheme to encourage healthier living...."

"[T]he Queen’s Speech promised a 'total ban online' for junk food. Food companies will be limited to factual claims about such products, such as price, ingredients and nutritional content, and will be unable to publish sponsored social media influencing about cakes, sweets, burgers and other unhealthy foods. Paid-for displays, web searches and promotional emails and text messages will also be banned. Advertisers believe that all social media posts about unhealthy products could be banned, although details have yet to be set out.... Critics say advertisements for avocados, smoked salmon, hummus, butter, cheese and some fruit could be banned if the rules are drawn too tightly."

From "Queen’s Speech includes ban on online junk food ads to curb obesity" (The London Times). 

Here's the text of the speech. She actually refers to "obesity": "Measures will be brought forward to support the health and wellbeing of the nation, including to tackle obesity and improve mental health." 

Do American politicians ever tell us we're too fat? I think not, even though obesity has been a huge factor in coronavirus deaths. They're so much more comfortable telling us how close we should be to our loved ones than broaching the big bigness topic.