Monthly Archive for December, 2007

“Forget the Die-Its; Learn to Live-It”

Just in time for consideration as a New Year’s Resolution is Karen Knox’ new book, “Forget the Die-Its; Learn to Live-It.” I can’t read a diet book, but this book may be something different. Karen seems more concerned about getting me to understand what different foods do to the body, than teaching me how to count calories. In fact, this book isn’t about counting anything, no calories, no carbs, no fat grams. No, this book is about something else altogether.

Karen’s approach is that I should learn to live it. She points out that our tastebuds are addicted to the sugars and other foods we eat (crave). We all recognize that we have been trained by commercial advertising to eat this or that and all the bad things we have learned are showing up in our overweight kids. So Karen’s focus and goal is to educate us, to get us to learn why we eat and why certain foods are better than others.

Karen recommends that everyone read “The China Study” by T. Colin Campbell which she describes as a comprehensive study of the relationship between food and disease. Karen says that if we learned and understood the science behind food, we might make different choices about what we eat. For example, she says that science proves that the higher the consumption of animal products, the higher the rate of disease in a particular population.

Rather than discussing calories and carbs, Karen talks about “micro-nutrients.” What the heck is a micro-nutrient? The things you need, not the things you need to avoid. Like vitamins and enzymes. The simple truth is that plant products have much more of the nutrients we need than do meat products.

A good illustration of the relationship between food and disease can be seen with the blood. Blood needs to be slightly alkaline. Meat, however, is acidic. So when you pack your body with meat, your acid level goes up and in order for the blood to retain its alkalinity, the body uses calcium. And where does it get the calcium? Our bones? The result: depending on your age, diet etc., you may be losing bone density.

Karen believes we have taken the real purpose of food, providing fuel for the body, and made it subservient to something entirely different: what tastes good and what we like. Of course, we like what we eat because it tastes good and it tastes good because that is the way we have learned to eat. We can learn to eat a different food and have a different diet and it will taste just as good. If we ate foods that provided the best fuel, the micro-nutrients, we wouldn’t have to worry about weight. Our weight would take care of itself.

So how are we going to L-E-A-R-N?

L - Lifestyle: she’s talking about longterm changes, not just losing 20 or 30 lbs. or more;
E - Exercise: do you understand why exercise is important (metabolism);
A - Attitude: stinking thinkin’ or positive outlook;
R - Rest: how important it is;
N - Nutrition: not calories and carb counting.

Karen has organized her book into 12 chapters, one chapter each month, one aspect of a healthy lifestyle each month: water, plant-based versus animal-based programs, fasting and prayer, fiber and the real “bread of life”, the truth about protein, ideas for children, exercise and sunshine, rest, eliminating garbage foods. sugar sabotage, being thankful, and setting goals.

The rest is up to you. See you back here next December.

 
 Karen Knox, Author, "Forget the Die-Its; Learn to Live-It" [29:02m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (126)

What Romney Should Have Said!

If Romney’s apology for being a Mormon impressed anyone, I can only assume they don’t live in America. If they do live in America, they need remedial education in Constitution 101. I don’t know if I am more embarrassed for Romney having to make the speech or for America for needing the assurrance.

I think Obama should do the same. I want to make sure that because he is black he doesn’t let some deep-seated resentment about slavery cause him to murder me in my sleep if he becomes Commander-in-Chief.

And I sure as hell want Hillary to swear to heaven that I don’t have to worry about an executive order requiring all first born sons to be castrated. (BTW, I was not a first born.)

Since Romney is running as a Republican, maybe I should direct my disgust at a party whose support for a candidate is apparently influenced by his religious orientation. However, I have little reason to believe that a Mormon candidate would not have to do the same thing had he been born a Democrat.

My sympathy, if any, for Romney is tempered by the fact that he asked for it. I don’t recall when it was or exactly what he said, but I seem to remember some months ago he made a reference to his faith. Well, open the door and let the morons come in. Say hello to all those non-judgmental people that are going to judge what that means. Frankly, when a candidate affirms his faith, I know two things: (1) He is being handled by someone, and (2) I am being manipulated.

I want an honest man, a guy who hasn’t been indicted for taking money under the table. I would probably hold wealth against someone (because I wonder about their ability to understand what “We the People” need), before their religious orientation.

Anyone that can look at a Romney and worry about the extent to which a good, moral man would ask his church what he should do about NAFTA certainly needs to be checked for alien implants.

I am much more concerned about the quiet egomaniac who had a religious experience and now is amazed that God has chosen him to be President. That kind of guy is likely to start a war with God’s enemies. He scares me to death regardless of whether he is a Mormon, a Methodist, a Baptist or whatever.

I sincerely hope that the need for candidates to disclaim undue influence by their church or their faith is a Republican perversion, because I want to vote for a candidate who will tell some folks to go to hell. That is why I won’t vote for a preacher for president or dog catcher. If any of this offends you, …………………………….

Dale Cardwell, Candidate for U. S. Senate, Georgia

Dale Cardwell, was an investigative reporter with WSB-TV for 12 years. He broke the story about the corruption of Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell. Now, he has decided to investigate politics from the inside and is running for the Democratic nomination for US Senator from Georgia.

Although he is running as a Democrat, Dale hopes to appeal to dissatisfied Republicans as well. In fact, he said that he has received as much support from Republicans as he has from Democrats. He thinks people are feed up with politics as usual and sees ‘08 as having the potential of being a vote against incumbents, like Saxby Chambliss, and in favor of change.

And why would people, Democrats and Republicans alike, vote against Chambliss? Several reasons:

(1) Dale points out that Chambliss has been a willing participant in a Republican majority that is responsible for out of control deficit spending. Chambliss has been a key supporter of the biggest spending presidency in recent memory. For me, Chambliss is a poster child for blind loyalty. Bush could not have made the mess he has were it not for Republican Senators like Saxby Chambliss.

(2) How many people really understand Chambliss’ unrestrained support of anything Bush, such as the total waste in Iraq?

(3) Chambliss teamed up with Teddy Kennedy on “immigration reform” which was nothing more than amnesty and a refusal to secure our borders. Chambliss “saw the light” only when presented with an overwhelming public backlash. Now, Chambliss is trying to make everyone believe he was for securing our borders.

(4) Likewise, Chambliss voted against S-CHIP funding for healthcare for kids, but has no qualms about supporting programs that funnel millions to big agribusinesses, some of his biggest supporters. He voted against healthcare for kids because tobacco companies opposed it due to the fact that it was to be financed with higher taxes on cigarettes. According to Dale, Chambliss is one of the biggest recipients of tobacco money.

Of course, it takes money to run for public office, but Dale believes his name recognition as a reporter with WSB will give him an advantage. He points to the fact that Sonny Perdue was able to defeat the incumbent Roy Barnes.

But Dale is determined to run a campaign supported by everyday Georgiana, not lobbyists and PACs. Dale points out that his average contribution is about $200, while Chambliss’ is $1,600.

Dale is also trying to take advantage of the internet in getting his message out. In addition to his campaign website he has launched “DALETHETRUTH.com” where he uses his investigative abilities to publish videos explaining how Chambliss has sold his soul to giant corporations.

Dale doesn’t believe Georgia is a red state, and points to Paul Braun’s victory in the 10th District Congressional election as evidence that voters don’t want political insiders, like Jim Whitehead, in office. And then, Hank Johnson beat Cynthia McKinney in the 4th Congressional District.

Dale recognizes that the coming battle in America is not rich versus poor, but corporations versus the rest of us. All business is not good business, particularly when it does not take into due consideration the good of the customer and the stockholder. While the stock market has soared, the average American family is making $1000 a year less today than 6 years ago.

Politicians don’t tell us the truth because they want to get re-elected. Dale says he wants to change that. He wants to tell us what we need to know. I am all for that Dale, but I am reminded how fickle we are when it comes to politics. We just prefer to vote for people that tell us what we want to hear, even if they lie. Someday, someday, we will change. Maybe ‘08!

Dale says that the ordinary citizen wants three things from government:

(1) We want to be left alone.

(2) We want government to stay out of our pocket books. He considers himself to be a fiscal conservative and points out that Chambliss has been a key supporter of one of the biggest deficit spending administrations in recent memory.

(3) Illegal immigration is a giant problem. People want our borders secured. They want our laws enforced and employers held accountable for hiring illegal aliens.

 
 Dale Cardwell, Candidate, U. S. Senate GA [29:46m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (152)

Erick Discusses Huckabee and The Republican Field!

I woke up to Mike Huckabee this morning. He is all over the place. Polls have him ahead in Iowa, and behind in New Hampshire. He was being accused of letting rapists out of prison to murder innocent people. I thought that was another Mike (Dukakis)! Apparently, some of his boost in the polls is the result of the recent “CNN/YouTube Debate” in which Huckabee correctly answered the most important political question of this campaign: “Do you believe this book?”

So, I called Erick Erickson to find out what the heck is going on with Republicans! The interesting thing is that Erick interpreted the question as being a challenge by a non-believer asking if the candidates were dumb enough to believe the Bible. Curiously, I had exactly the opposite impression: a believer challenging the candidates to state, without qualification, that they believed every word of the Bible. The difference in interpretation is fascinating to me. I wonder who heard it right.

But it really doesn’t matter. The question was one of those that is meaningless in the political arena. I wouldn’t believe a politician that gave the “religiously correct” answer. It was a set-up question, and the issue Erick and I discuss is how did we get to the point that such questions pass for political debate? I get the impression from Erick that a lot of the campaigns were not particularly happy with a lot of the questions. In fact, Erick indicates he is trying to organize another debate with the Republican candidates since the CNN/YouTube debate was such a farce.

Erick thinks CNN picked the wrong questions, wondering why questions were asked on religion, abortion and immigration. According to Erick, these are not the issues that Republicans want to know about. I am glad to hear that, but if this is true, it means two things: (1) some people, maybe a lot of them, don’t know what Republicans want, because I think these are issues a lot of Republicans here in Georgia are interested in, and (2) the evangelical branch of the Republican party is not nearly as influential as it was in previous campaigns.

The point of this discussion was simply that what is passed off as “debates” in this election cycle is pretty much nothing more than entertainment. It seems to me that a lot of the questions that get presented by these “people” moderators, are intentionally selected to make the candidates squirm and hopefully give the sound bite of the night.

Did Huckebee’s answer about religion spur his rise in the polls? Erick points out that Huckabee has a 10 member campaign staff (that’s nationwide, by the way) and in Iowa, Huckabee has spent only about $300,000, compared with Romney’s $7 million. He thinks Huckabee’s popularity is due to the fact that people are tired of insiders. That’s the reason Obama is doing well against Hillary. People want a change.

Erick sees Fred Thompson and John McCain as the only two Republican candidates who have a chance of bridging the diverse interests of the Republican Party, rather than dividing it. Rudy isn’t liked by the social conservatives, Romney isn’t trusted by the evangelicals and Huckabee is running into problems with the fiscal conservatives. Erick doesn’t think Ron Paul has a chance. So, if by the end of Super Tuesday, the nomination is not locked in, McCain or Thompson may be the go to guys for party unity. Interesting, very interesting.

Erick thinks Huckabee’s current rise will be short-lived and he sees it as Rudy-Romney contest. He also thinks people are beginning to realize that were it not for 9-11, Rudy would be just another big-city mayor.

Erick refers to Huckabee as the “passive voice.” I am not entirely sure I understand the meaning, but he gave several examples where Huckabee would make a statement about some problem (CEO compensation, for example), and yet, when asked what he would do about the issue, he seems to back off and say he didn’t mean to imply that government needed to do anything about it.

He also referred to Huckabee as a slick preacher. As for the pardon of the rapist in Arkansas, Erick points out that Huckabee, as Governor, did not have the power to pardon the felon, that was done by the Pardons and Parole Board. The issue is the extent to which Huckabee pushed the Board to take action and pardon the guy. He points out that there was apparently a lot of sympathy generated for the rapist because before he was convicted he was forcibly abducted and castrated by a vigilante group.

As for the Democrats, Erick still thinks Hillary will be the nominee. I am not so sure.

One last point about the new National Intelligence Estimate on Iran that indicates Iran gave up its nuclear program several years ago. Last year it reported the opposite: Iran was increasing its efforts to develop nuclear weapons. So what is going on? As Erick points out, neither he, nor anyone else trusts the intelligence community any more. That’s a sad state of affairs, but more troubling is the idea that we went to war in Iraq as a result, at least in part, of flawed intelligence and a few weeks ago, it looked like we were going to war with Iran, again based on flawed intelligence. This is not the way to run a country!

Erick thinks heads will roll, but probably not publically I just wish the President would respond in a manner that indicates he consistently reads the newspapers, even if it is the comic page.

At the end of the interview, I spend a few minutes talking with Lisa Chesser, who won election to the Vidalia City Council on Tuesday. CONGRATULATIONS Lisa!!

 
 Erick Erickson, Republican Strategist [27:17m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (126)

Will We Ever Have “Freedom From Oil?”

I do not understand gas and oil. Oil is almost $90 per barrel crude and about $3.10 a gallon in the car. I thought the world was supposed to end when it reached $50 per barrel. I thought I was paying $3.00+ per gallon when it was $50 per barrell. I know damn good and well it doesn’t cost any more to pump it out of the ground today than it did a couple of years ago. So how come it’s almost $100 per barrell?

But why dwell on something you can’t do anything about i.e., the current price of oil? Congress surely isn’t going to do anything about it. Never has, never will. So let’s focus on tomorrow. How do we get away from being subservient to oil? To answer that question, I wanted to interview someone who has a plan. David Sandalow is an expert on energy, a former Assistant Secretary of State and a Senior Director on the National Security Council staff. Now, he is a Senior Fellow on Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institute. His current book is “Freedom From Oil: How the Next President Can End the United States’ Oil Addiction.” David is dead serious about reducing our dependence on oil. You can read the book or visit the Freedom From Oil, but regardless, you need to get your heart, mind and soul set to live with less oil.

David is ready to do his part. He has a prototype car that he plugs in every night, charges the battery and drives up to 30 miles without ever burning a drop of gasoline. Think about the independence such a vehicle could provide to all those people who drive less than 30 miles a day to and from work. But you can’t buy David’s car, at least, not right now, but he expects it and others to be available in 3 or 4 years. Check out the Chevy Volt.

I remember the “oil crisis” during the Carter Administration and the long lines at the pump. What I really don’t understand is why, 30 years later, we are virtually no further along weaning America from its dependency on oil. Remember all those years ago when we all thought we were going to have to ride around in small cars. The next thing I know, I am buying a SUV. But, this is not my fault!

I think the problem has been a total failure of leadership, political leadership, corporate leadership, any and all kinds of leadership. Our leaders never chose a direction away from oil dependence. This is a bipartisan failure, Democrat and Republican. But, what is done is done. Blaming all or any of them is not productive and doesn’t save a drop of gas. (In fact, it may give you gas to think about it!)

David’s goal is to encourage us to chose the road out of this dilemma. He tells the story of the American General commanding the western forces in Iraq who wondered why he had to endanger the lives of his men and women delivering fuel to run electric generators. Surrounded by an abundance of wind and sun, he requested generators that could run on these alternative sources of energy. The Pentagon is working on it. You would think they would have thought of this one after 1991 or at least after they started painting all their vehicles tan for fun and sun in the wind and sun of the deserts of the Middle East.

David sees hope in solving the dependency problem because of two basic differences between today and the past. First, while this has always been tagged as a national security issue, national security has changed since 9-11. Today, it is easier to image oil producing countries like Venezuela and Iran intentionally depriving us of oil and attempting to disrupt our economy. Second, there is a lot of money to be made by companies that solve the problems associated with global warming. It is precisely because there is money to be made that we will be able to solve the problem. Making money motivates.

He mentions meeting with Newt Gingrich and Howard Dean on separate occasions and both offering the same essential solution: a massive, Manhatten type project to develop alternative fuels and alternative energy sources.

It seems the problem for consumers is the lack of available choices. Our market economy gives us thousands of choices with regard to most things we want to buy, except when it comes to cars. When it comes to cars, we basically have one choice: buy something that burns oil. He points to Brazil which has replaced about half its fuel consumption with ethanol. If Brazil can do it, why can’t we? Simple, a lack of leadership.

How long will it take to obtain this freedom from oil? David says a generation, 20 years. Why? Well, there are about 240 million cars on the road in America and we can’t afford to just scrap them. They will have to wear out. (Based on the longevity of cars, I estimate that all cars on the road today will be ready for the scrap pile by April 1, 2010, so I am not sure why it will take 18 more years.)

According to my calculations, about the time we achieve independence from oil, social security will go bust, and I will be wearing diapers. But at least David gives me hope that my grandchildren will have a greater appreciation for conservation and preservation than my generation.

 
 David Sandalow, Author, Freedom From Oil [24:45m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (114)

Joe Seehusen, Deputy Campaign Manager, Tells Me About Ron Paul!

He raised $4 million in campaign contributions in one day. He’s a Republican Congressman from Texas, but he would end the Iraq War quicker than any Democrat–or Republican. He carries a copy of the US Constitution in his pocket. He answers questions whether you like it or not. He thinks most of the federal agencies are illegal and should be abolished. He believes the States ought to have to fix their own problems, keep their own money and be responsible to their own people, not beholden to the money dispensers in Washington. His concept of government is not what we were taught in 10th grade civics. It is different, maybe even radical, and Ron Paul scares a lot of people because if he were elected and had his way, two things would happen: (1) all those power brokers in and out of government would experience what many average Americans experience everyday: unemployment and uncertainty about paying the mortgage by the 10th of the month, and (2) “we the people” would have to grow up and govern ourselves on a local level and could no longer blame Washington for our problems.

Or at least that is what Joe Seehusen, Deputy Campaign Manager for Ron Paul for President, told me. My thanks to Joe for the interview. While I won’t hold Ron Paul personally responsible for everything and anything Joe said, as Deputy Campaign Manager, I assume his answers reflect generally the attitude and approach of Ron Paul. For that reason, I will talk about Ron Paul, not Joe. Sorry, Joe, but I guess that just goes with the job.

While Ron Paul is elected as a Republican, he is a Libertarian if he is anything. And I don’t say that with any degree of criticism. Trained as an obstetrician, he is known as “Dr. No” because of his consistent votes against things like the “Bridge to NoWhere.”

Ron Paul (and Joe) believes in the Constitution like the religious right believes in the Bible. He is dead serious about restoring the power to the States, and in doing so, gutting the federal government. The problem with Ron Paul is he thinks we Americans are capable of governing ourselves, that instead of griping and moaning and being thankful there is someone else to blame, we could actually deal with most of our problems on a state by state basis.

While Ron Paul has recently gotten a boost, he is still in single digits in the polls. I don’t think he has a chance to win the election, but in many ways I wish he did. If he were in the lead, maybe it would prove to us that we really do want a candidate to tell us the truth, not just what we want to hear.

Take campaign finance. Most of us believe there is too much money in politics. We don’t like the power that lobbyists exert over the people that are supposed to be doing what is best for us. Most of us would probably support laws that restrict the influence of money. Ron Paul, however, thinks differently, radically different. I would say even refreshingly different. Joe would not represent himself as speaking for Ron Paul on this issue, so I have to say this is what Joe thought the answer to the problem is. The answer is to take away the power of the politicians to give the lobbyist what they want. If there are no federal agencies regulating business activities, if Congress isn’t passing budgets to spend trillions of our dollars, the things that lobbyist go to Washington for won’t exist. Now, that is a radically different way to look at the problem.

I feel about Ron Paul like I feel about ending the war in Iraq. I am ready to end the war tomorrow. I agree that I don’t know what would happen as the result of an immediate pullout, but I am willing to deal with whatever that brings rather than staying there another day. I truly wish we, as a nation, had the courage to elect someone like Ron Paul. I think he scares us because his ideas are radical, they are not what we are accustomed to. But, I know we would survive, and we just might be the better for it.

And why could Ron Paul raise $4 million in one day? Because there are a lot of people in this country that are not opposed to revolution, who are not married to the old ideas about government and how it should be run. They are growing in numbers and impatience. It is just a matter of time. It may be 2008. It may be 2012.

We may not elect Ron Paul next year, but I am confident that America is lost unless and until we grasp a radical new concept of government. That new concept may not be 100% Ron Paul or 100% Democrat or 100% Republican, but whatever it is, we need it to survive.

 
 Joe Seehusen, Deputy Campaign Manager, Ron Paul for President [30:31m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (118)

Capitalism and the Stock Market: Speculation vs. Investment

If you are concerned about the financial security of America, or if you think the stock market is a place to make a quick profit, or if you don’t understand investing in general, this interview with John C. Bogle may be of benefit to you. Without question, he has earned the right to comment on capitalism. John Bogle was a pioneer in mutual funds. He founded The Vanguard Group in 1954. In 2004 he was named by Time Magazine as one of the 100 most powerful and influential people in the world. A man who has been on the cutting edge for years, he also blogs.

He likes to be called “Jack” and he is the kind of person that gives someone like me, a small-town radio host, the same opportunity as Bill Moyers or CNN. In fact, he may have given me more. To show you what kind of person Jack is, I have to tell you that I started this interview several weeks ago, but 5 minutes into it, the transmitter at the radio station failed and we had to reschedule. Jack was unphased. He was happy to take the time to set it all up again. I was amazed. Still am!

He is also an author. I had seen his interview in September wth Bill Moyers regarding his recent book, “The Battle for the Soul of Capitalism.” He has written another book recently, “The Little Book of Common Sense Investing: The Only Way to Guarantee Your Share of Stock Market Returns.” And, he has written many more.

I do not think this interview does justice to the scope and breadth of Jack Bogle’s wisdom. He understands the good side of capitalism and he captures with clarity and insight where capitalism has gone wrong. Capitalism used to be about markets and products, providing what people needed and selling the best product that money could buy. Somewhere in the past, capitalism sought to benefit the worker and to reward him for his loyalty and industry. Where are these qualities in the capitalism that rules the world today? Gone! Gone with the wind!

Why? Because capitalism has lost its focus and now serves the CEO, the financial managers, the Wall Street stock broker, not the owners, the shareholders. The forcus is on making money by any means and if laying off hundreds of employees to turn a quick buck is necessary, that is all in a days work. CEOs and corporate boards scratch each other’s back with exhorbitant compensation packages that, in reality, create a conflict of interest between those in control of a corporation and those who own it.

I am not an investor. I do not understand the stock market. I do not understand day traders. If I knew that Jack Bogle was handling my investments, I wouldn’t have to worry about whether or not I was being lied to, tricked or sold down the river. I cannot begin to do justice to his comments. I can only be thankful that at least one billionare cares about the security of the common man.

If you want to know his advice for sound investing, you will just have to listen to the interview. And, read the book!

 
 John C. Bogle, Author and Investment Expert [30:29m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (106)