Now to be fair, I walked in halfway through the segment and may have missed something, but the crux of the argument seemed to be as follows:

1. There is a proposed tax on salty foods

2. Although this is a liberal show, this tax would constitute too much government intervention.

3. Eliminating salt would make food flavorless.

There is a HUGE hole in this argument, and it is one that the Turks often fall into, and that hole is a general lack of understanding when it comes to environmental and health issues. Sorry guys, it's not your strong area.

My problem with your argument as you seem to lay it out is pretty simple, and is backed up by prominent environmentalists, food advocates, and people who like REAL food.

The reason you think you need as much salt and flavoring for your food as you do is because you (and America as a whole) are eating substandard food. Basically, super processed, refined, modified, packaged food tastes like garbage when left to it's own devices. To make it palatable, food producers load it with mind blowing amounts of sugar, sugar stand-ins, salt, and artificial flavorings.

If you're eating real foods, fresh vegetables, properly raised meats and eggs, and actually cooking them yourself and not just opening a can, the amount of salt and other unhealthy additives you need are negligible.

I.E. There is a reason a meal at the Golden Arches has more salt, sugar, and fat than a comparable meal you eat at home.

Which brings me to the government intervention question and why this too is wrong (or right, for a different reason).

There are many reasons why processed food is less expensive than real food, why a bag of  chips is cheaper than fresh fruit, why a burger can cost $1 while an organic apple can cost twice that. Of course there is the factor of economics of scale and mass production, but what doesn't often get brought up is...you guessed it... government intervention. Every year we federally subsidize the agribusiness industry to the tune of several billion dollars. But this money does not go to small scale local farms (maybe because they can't afford lobbyists). No, we give money to huge farms to raise bumper crops of corn, soybeans, and other monoculture crops. With prices so low, these crops find there way into everything (read a food label) and especially into livestock feed.

So, if you believe that taxing salt is going too far, certainly pouring billions into corporations is an equally egregious overstep of federal authority. But keep in mind, if you take away those subsidies, the price of commodities like corn and soy rises, which in turn raises the prices of all of those hyper-processed salt laden foods that they get made into.

The "future of food" is hopefully one of a return to real flavor, brought on by a resurgence of local and fresh and REAL foods that don't need to be disguised with artificial flavorings. What is going to bring about this real food renaissance is equal footing in the marketplace, either through elimination of subsidies or increasing taxes on the foods that are making us sicker. Either way, when a fair marketplace is finally created, then you can argue about freedom of choice, but you can't argue freedom while unfavorably stacking the deck in favor of the unhealthy option.

You guys are too awesome to get something like this wrong. With all of your work on health care, I'll close with a quote from noted food advocate Michael Pollan and say: "You can't fix the health care system until we address our broken food system." Eat whatever you want, just be fair and pay the actual cost.