bob blog

…I have some very worthy time suckers for you. First, Nate at  FiveThirtyEight.com offers some shrewd analysis (and leaning on, I should add, the perspicacity of Al Giordano)  of what might be behind the McCain campaign’s recent decision to reduce funding in Colorado and four other states and focus instead on Pennsylvania. Essentially they’re auguring a return to attacks featuring Jeremiah Wright and appeals to “fears of pigmentation”, as Nate terms it. It will be interesting to see if this indeed turns out to be the case – as well as how PA finally  votes, considering that no one really sees the angle that the McCain campaign is apparently finding in focusing their efforts there.

Oh, and finally  – please do check out this video over at Lenin’s Tomb of Professor of Economics at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, Richard D Wolff, and a Marxist analysis of the current financial crisis (although he eschews terming it just a “financial” crisis).  It’s boiled down to be pretty simple to understand – but it’s highly compelling.

In the New York Review of Books, Peter W. Galbraith writes an excellent short history of the shifting power struggle in Iraq since the US invasion of 2003, focusing particularly on the “The Surge” of 2007 which McCain stakes so much of his candidacy on. He sums it up:

John McCain says that partly because of his persistent support of the surge, we are now winning the Iraq war. He defines victory as an Iraq that is a democratic ally. Yet he advocates continued US military support to an Iraqi government led by Shiite religious parties committed to the establishment of an Islamic republic. He takes a harder line on Iran than President Bush, but supports Iraqi factions that are Iran’s closest allies in the Middle East. He praises the Awakening and but seems not to have realized that the Iraqi government is intent on crushing it. He has denounced the Obama-Biden plan for a decentralized state but has said nothing about how he would protect Iraq’s Kurds, the only committed American allies in the country.

George W. Bush has put the United States on the side of undemocratic Iraqis who are Iran’s allies. John McCain would continue the same approach. It is hard to understand how this can be called a success—or a path to victory.

Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.

Happy Monday!

Ooh, snap!

My friend Neil sent this to me. Brilliant!

I concur with your assessment and suggestions, Mr. Editor.

This past January, I finally got around to getting a full health checkup. Forty is really just around the corner (what is four years anymore? Over in a flash!), and I intend to reach that seminal birthday with an aces bill of health. Last year was a busy year, however, and the exercise regiment suffered a hit, and attention to diet had flagged as well. So anyways I ran the gamut of tests, and everything came out normal, except my “Lipid Profile”, which was not quite optimal:

Triglicerides (Desired: < 150)
My score: 119. I’m well under 150 here, so I guess this is okay…
HDL Cholesterol (Desired: > 40)
My score: 39. HDL is the so-called “good” cholesterol. I could use a boost here.
LDL Cholesterol (Desired: < 100)
My score: 147. LDL is the “bad” cholesterol. I’m definitely high here – needs to come down.
Total Cholesterol (Desired: <200 - closer to 180 the better)
My Score: 210.

So the cholesterol is a little out of whack. I attribute this entirely to bad dietary habits. This is an obvious factor to consider even if you don’t know a lot about what cholesterol actually is or how it impacts the body. When I initially became interested in learning how to improve my cholesterol – I really knew nothing more than that it was bad. I knew eggs were a source of dietary cholesterol – but beyond that I couldn’t say much. In retrospect, I probably knew less than the average person…

I quickly learned, though, that the source of dietary cholesterol is animal fats – it’s present in varying amounts in any creature that walks, crawls or swims – any creature that breathes. Now I’m speaking entirely as a lay observer here, and this is in no way a scientific assertion, but my guess is that the main source of cholesterol issues for those following a more or less traditional “Western” diet is the consumption of too much meat. In discussions with J, it quickly became clear that in my own case I was eating far too much cow. I love cow in all it’s culinary manifestations – hamburgers, ice-cream, etc. Initially I protested – but J made it clear to me that the frequency with which I gravitated to cow products in my diet was far greater than I was initially prepared to accept. I suppose I wanted to play the victim – the way I saw it, I was doing plenty to be healthy – at the time I was running 20-25 miles a week, and dammit I ate a salad occasionally – that should be enough! It should be said, though, that J often possesses a mature, tough minded perspective on things that I frequently lack, largely, I must admit, from an embarrassing streak of willful puerility in my character (J, with typical precocity, gave up cow products many years ago – possibly in her teens). I have other traits though – such as a lifelong interest in maintaining my own health – and this is, again, probably born out of an aggregation of even more unflattering traits such as narcissism and self-absorption – but in any case that, combined with the irrefutable claims of both my minatory January lipid profile and J’s frank observations of my eating habits have forced me into admitting that it was time to pay closer attention to how I eat and why my diet is apparently ill-serving me.

As I’ve learned about cholesterol, I’ve evolved a personal strategy that I’m endeavoring to integrate as lifelong habits, which I’ll enumerate below. It should be said again, though – that I am in no way an expert and assert no scientific rigor to my personal findings upon reading about the subject. When I say this or that is “tested”, I guess I’m really saying that I trust the sources that I’ve derived the information from enough to heed any implicit advice or suggestion that has been made towards improving one’s health. I think that too often when readers – including me – encounter an article that bandies about the notion that this or that is supported by tests or clinical trials – we are susceptible to immediately surrendering skepticism and embracing what we are being told as truth, no longer to be questioned. Many of these “tests” though do not possess adequate controls, are not conducted for significant periods of time, and frequently these articles leave out pieces of information that may be vital to our understanding the significance of said tests. Also, it should be asked – who paid for tests or trials? Who paid the writer of the article? It’s really hard for me, and I suspect most others – to continually chase down these kinds of questions. So, to wrap up this digression – I’ll just say that this is not a static strategy – it will most certainly change – possibly radically, as I continue to learn more about my health and how to maintain it.

Read the rest of this entry »

Another “Phoenix Lights” incident occurred last night, similar to the famous event witnessed by thousands in Phoenix in 1997.
According to the Arizona Republic, civilian and military aviation organizations say that the source of the lights remains unknown. Witnesses have claimed that as the lights moved east, they were followed by three jets from out of the west.
Read the rest of this entry »

As far as beer goes, for many years I was a hops man – the more hops the better – and so my favorite beers of that period were the likes of Liberty Ale, Sierra-Nevada Pale, and so on. For the past few years though I have really swung in the opposite direction. It’s as if I’ve just totally burned out on that pungent yet noble grain. For a while now I’ve really been favoring brown ales. Newcastle is fairly ubiquitous when out and about, and so I’ll often automatically order that if I’m not in a whisky mood. As far as brown ales are concerned, that’s all your likely to find – although you might chance upon Samuel Smith’s excellent Nut Brown Ale – unless you go to a place bar/pub/restaurant-what-have-you that specializes in beers and other spirits. Here in Atlanta “Taco Mac” comes to mind, and I can’t fail to mention Decatur’s awesome Brick Store Pub, where you’ll often find a brown on tap. I first discovered Brooklyn Beer’s Brown there. I believe the first time I had Ellie’s Brown was at the Brick Store also. This is a great, solid beer – it’s nutty but not crazy nutty like Sam Smith’s correlate. It’s flavorful without knocking you over the head with any particular characteristic – just well balanced. The kind of beer you could enjoyable sip all night – what the folks at the Brick Store refer to as “a fine session beer”.