Morning Links

Tuesday, February 1st, 2011
Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

43 Responses to “Morning Links”

  1. #1 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    Don’t skip over “Runner Up”, which is a summary of dietary guidelines posed by the state. Over/under for facepalms is a dozen.

  2. #2 |  Big A | 

    The fascinating interview is indeed good, but it’s with Brooke Alvarez of Onion News Network, not Pamela Geller.

  3. #3 |  Pablo | 

    The food guidelines are a mixed bag. Some good stuff there–more seafood and vegetables, and they are finally acknowleding that white flour and sugar really aren’t good for you after all.

    The emphasis on “eating less” and counting calories in bound to fail. If overweight people conciously restrict portions and count calories they will be hungry most of the time and virtually no one can put up with constant hunger if food is available. The alternative is to eat foods that satisfy one’s appetite without raising insulin levels too much–e.g. protein and fat, not grains/starches or sugars. The lowfat stuff is B.S. and one reason we have so much obesity and diabetes, e.g. people are so scared to eat fat that they focus on carbs instead. So they are hungry as soon as blood sugar falls and the elevated insulin causes fat deposition.

    None of this is new or in much dispute. Its just not talked about much because it means the USDA and mainstream medical authorities have been giving bad advice on diet for the last 40 years or so.

  4. #4 |  Big A | 

    Regarding the food guidelines- here’s a link to FatHead, a film responding to Supersize Me by discussing, among many other good points, obesity and how government regulations have essentially lead us there.

    http://www.hulu.com/watch/196879/fat-head

  5. #5 |  TomG | 

    Glad to know the interview wasn’t with Pamela Geller. I don’t think I have any interest in the kind of bigoted crap that woman has in her head.

  6. #6 |  J sub D | 

    Stay away from the television at mealtime and skip the hamburgers in favor of seafood and vegetables, says the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    This is what my mother and elementary schoolteachers taught me before I was 8. I would love to see the total spent on educating wasted on nagging Americans how to eat by the Department of Agriculture and the FDA over the last 50 years.

  7. #7 |  ClubMedSux | 

    The post-Wire article neglected to mention that Chad L. Coleman (“Cutty”) also had a bit part in two episodes of the most recent season of It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia. It wasn’t the most exciting role, but it was still fun to watch my favorite drama and my favorite comedy collide.

  8. #8 |  J sub D | 

    A preview! A Preview! My kingdom for a preview!

  9. #9 |  Pete | 

    Re: The FBI and their intelligence gathering becomes lawbreaking – If only we had some sort of federalbureau who had as part of its mandate the responsibility to investigate civil liberties violations by government entities.

  10. #10 |  Marty | 

    the governors live in an anecdotal world. facts get in the way of good policy.

  11. #11 |  Windy | 

    I am always annoyed by dietary advice that promotes soy, soy is bad for most people, especially the non-fermented soy, it (along with gluten, found in many grains) is one of the foods that most causes food allergies and given to infants in formula can cause serious lifetime problems with food allergies (as can gluten).

    I know this because my next to youngest grandson (age 11) was a victim of soy formula, he is now allergic to so many foods it is difficult for his mother to shop at a regular grocery store (and these allergies are not static, he could easily become allergic to more foods). He also has full blown celiac disease — just one tiny molecule of gluten could severely affect, perhaps even kill him (this gluten intolerance he inherited from his father, but it may have never affected him without the soy problem, it’s triggered by extreme stress or injury/illness).

  12. #12 |  omar | 

    Just one tiny molecule of gluten could severely affect, perhaps even kill him…

    For the sake of your grandson’s health, please fire your doctor.

  13. #13 |  Edgar B NYC | 

    Hey RB … when you interview the Oath Keeper guy, do me a favor and ask where the hell he was for the eight years before Obama was elected. I’m sure he was feverishly studying the Constitution, but just wanted to make sure.

  14. #14 |  J sub D | 

    @#13
    He was probably at the same place the anti-war protesters are today, not giving a rat’s ass because his guy was in charge.

  15. #15 |  sigh | 

    While I think banning any sort of knife is silly, the switchblade story is a bunch of nonsense. Anyone with a thumb and at least one finger can open and close a modern locking folding knife safely.

    If I had to make a guess, I’d say that this is another sneaky, back-door attempt to label non-automatic knives as “switchblades” if you can open them with one hand.

  16. #16 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    Is Joke Explainer really going to have to show up for the “Pamela Gellar” link?

    Well played, Radley.

  17. #17 |  EH | 

    Why is Reason running autoplay ads? Don’t they want people to visit the site?

  18. #18 |  Radley Balko | 

    I’m sure he was feverishly studying the Constitution, but just wanted to make sure.

    Actually, he was. He was in law school at Yale, where he wrote a paper on the Bush administration’s abuse of the Constitution.

  19. #19 |  Dave Krueger | 

    In the wake of Egypt’s shutdown of the internet, that stalwart of freedom (jk!), Joe Lieberman, is proposing that U.S. presidents need that same power.

    If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it a thousand times, the internet is way too much of a threat to any government for them to not have control over it. The internet gives civilian anger the power to morph into an full fledged revolution in mere hours. A motivated populace can overwhelm the government before it can even begin to mobilize. Up to now, most attempts to control the internet have taken the shape of preventing copyright infringement and fighting child porn, but eventually the population will support government control because, as we all know, security trumps freedom in most people’s minds.

  20. #20 |  CRNewsom | 

    @#12 omar: Thank you for saying that. That’s all I had to say.

  21. #21 |  Big A | 

    @ #16 Boyd- Sorry. Squeal was out of ignorance of Pamela Geller, not any sort of excitement over getting the joke.

  22. #22 |  Robert | 

    “I’m sure he was feverishly studying the Constitution, but just wanted to make sure.”

    “Actually, he was. He was in law school at Yale, where he wrote a paper on the Bush administration’s abuse of the Constitution.”

    ZING!

    O/K was around before the Obamamessaih was elected, but thanks for trying anyways.

  23. #23 |  Windy | 

    #2-12 & 20, you need to do some research into celiac disease before you make a statement like that. The “one molecule” may be a bit of an exaggeration, but he MUST avoid 100% corn tortillas at restaurants if they are fried in the same oil as flour tortillas and french fries at restaurants where flour based items are fried in the same oil. The problems that arise from not doing so put him in the hospital once already.

  24. #24 |  Victor Milan | 

    I’ll take Oath Keepers seriously when they give me a single rational reason not to mentally append “until we have a Republican president again!” to every one of their pious assertions.

    Where were they when Bush was launching the greatest “peacetime” expansion of government, and the massive terror attack on liberties misnamed the USA-PATRIOT Acts?

  25. #25 |  David | 

    O/K was around before the Obamamessaih was elected, but thanks for trying anyways.

    They were? Everything I can find about their founding, which admittedly isn’t much, says spring 2009.

  26. #26 |  Andrew S. | 

    Here’s a shocker for you. Police officer actually arrested for shooting. Off duty (I think, the article isn’t exactly well written), but still.

    Story’s all kinds of messed up. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/boynton-beach/fl-boynton-woman-shot-20110201,0,6688091.story

  27. #27 |  CyniCAl | 

    OT, but just to be fair to LEOs, they’re not the only ones in puppycide biz. This one’s atrocious, a one-company Doggie Einsatzgruppen from Canada:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110201/ap_on_re_ca/cn_canada_dog_slaughter

  28. #28 |  Pablo | 

    #26 Andrew–that is one fucked up article. I would be interested to hear more info on the “previous incidents” this cop was involved in.

  29. #29 |  Salt | 

    Finally glad to see Pamela Gellar on the only news show suited for her.

  30. #30 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    #26,
    Article states that the LEO broke several rules (such as giving a statement to the police before he spoke to his FOP rep). Plus, he left the scene. Standard procedure is to call the cops himself and then say nothing.

    Trust me, lots of cops are reading that article and mentally figuring out how easy it’d be to get out of there clean.

  31. #31 |  JThompson | 

    @Edgar and David: The only information I could find on their founding was in March 2009, and their first conference was in Oct 2009. I’d say the founding of it was based on a matter of when it was possible to found a group like this than anything else. Could you imagine what would’ve happened if a group like this had been founded when Bush was president?

    After reading through their site for a while, I don’t see anything worrying about them. I disagree with them on a few points, but they’re not calling for violence or support of a party.

  32. #32 |  Juice | 

    Re: the dog slaughter,

    He said it is now company policy that animals needing to be euthanized are treated at a veterinarian’s office.

    Treated? Need to be euthanized? What when there’s a downtick in business again? Shut the whole fucking thing down.

  33. #33 |  Juice | 

    If you go to http://howlingdogtours.com/ they have a disclaimer saying that they are not the same company where the culling occurred. They also link to this story:

    http://www.calgarysun.com/news/columnists/michael_platt/2011/01/31/17104521.html

  34. #34 |  InMD | 

    I have a lot of ambivalence towards the Oath Keepers. On the one hand I am glad to see some police opposing extreme “war on terrorism” powers. Nevertheless the stuff about refusing to round people up into concentration camps or support foreign soldiers against the citizenry, while appreciated, implies to me that they may not be particularly focused on the real day-to-day problems with law enforcement in this country.

    For one thing the police, as part of the executive branch, aren’t really the ones with authority to interpret the Constitution. I suppose they could promise not to constantly push the envelope but ultimately drawing those lines is the role of the judiciary. I’d be more impressed with a pledge to be respectful of civil liberties, honest about bad law enforcement policies and abuse, and to refrain from using every possible pretext to resort to violence. One of the reasons I respect groups like LEAP so much is that they attack these issues from a calm, rational, policy perspective, not hysterical stuff that sounds at least in part like it’s meant to appeal to the Glenn Beck crowd.

  35. #35 |  DPirate | 

    Pretty stunning disingenuousness from Steven Smith (and Radley Balko). That person was not saying anything like he’s made out. It should be obvious to anyone who bothers to read the excerpt that the meaning was “[though they may have few deaths,]… they will have yet fewer deaths if they do such-and-such”. You could say that the person feels lives are more important than freedoms, but not that laws are more important than lives.

    In other words, that deaths do matter above all, which is opposite to the statement Smith makes about the person quoted.

  36. #36 |  Highway | 

    Dpirate, it’s not disingenuous when the spokesperson says:

    Judith Stone, president of Washington, D.C.-based Advocates for Auto and Highway Safety, says the group does not consider fatalities when issuing its annual report card on states. “We look at laws and whether they’ve been passed,” Stone says.

    Says right there: We don’t look at fatalities. And if a seat belt or helmet law automatically makes a state safer, then why does a state like New Hampshire have better statistics *without* those laws? That’s what Smith is saying: The Governor’s Highway Safety Association cares more about the laws.

    If the group was more interested in saving lives, maybe they should look at what states that are supposedly ‘unsafe’ but have good statistics have for characteristics. Then instead of just ramming more laws down people’s throats, they could actually say why states with safer track records are safer.

  37. #37 |  luvzbob | 

    The “oath keepers” are an astroturf organization funded by the right wing politicos to spread false propoganda that the government has secret plans to take guns and place people in internment camps – the goal is to provoke an anti-government response in the electorate and thus advance the political fortunes of tea-party like candidates.

    One merely needs to look at the specifics of their oath to see that each item is actually a politically crafted message rather than a useful “oath” to protect americans.

    Want proof: Oath keepers claims to have many police officers as members – have you ever heard a police officer refusing to conduct a search because of the lack of a warrant? QED.

  38. #38 |  FridayNext | 

    After the Wire was interesting but it totally left out all the Barksdales including Wood Harris as Avon and Larry Gilliard. Neither has done a lot, except for the popular The Wire, Law and Order, CSI trifecta. (MY favorite Law and Order/Wire tie in was when Brother Mazone defended Namond) But still.

    And why no love for Michael Williams’ role in Wonderful World? The movie was fairly forgettable, but he was good, though in coma for much of the movie, and he got to do a Senegalese accent. Maybe no one recognized him because he wasn’t playing a criminal. (Or a cop as he was in Gone Baby Gone also not mentioned)

  39. #39 |  shecky | 

    I’m (still) pretty wary about the Oath Keepers. I’m just not seeing this upswell of self appointed Constitutional interpreters among law enforcement. And if I did, I’m not sure how secure that would make me feel. Additionally, they seem to expend a bit too much energy dogwhistling to the Glenn Beck crowd.

  40. #40 |  DPirate | 

    Highway, it is either disingenuous or it is being obtuse. The question of why New Hampshire has lower death rates without seat belt laws is certainly due to some other factor(s), as seat belts factually save lives. You can look at statistics or just ask a race car driver about that if you are suspicious.

    Again, the spokesman cares about the laws because they save lives. Hence, the spokesman cares about lives, not death. The rest of what you said I have no issue with – I think seat belts ought to be a choice, as well. More than that I value people being honest about other’s positions and devalue people who twist other’s statements to support their own prejudices.

    Smith should just call the person he’s quoted a liar if he wants to make the point he is making, because it is otherwise unsupported.

  41. #41 |  markm | 

    From my one trip into NH, I wonder if the reason for their lower traffic fatality rate is that they build roads so poorly that even on rural highways it is impossible to drive over 40mph. What are their rates of fender-benders and non-fatal injuries?

  42. #42 |  Barry | 

    “A good lesson from Egypt for the people who criticize Oath Keepers. I’ll have an interview with OK founder Stewart Rhodes that will go online next week.”

    Radley, you’re not stupid – why do you look at groups which seem to be both right-wing, and not exactly prominent against Bush, and conclude that they’re anything but a bunch of right-wingers whose only complaint is who is in charge?

  43. #43 |  Radley Balko | 

    Radley, you’re not stupid – why do you look at groups which seem to be both right-wing, and not exactly prominent against Bush, and conclude that they’re anything but a bunch of right-wingers whose only complaint is who is in charge?

    Because instead of relying on left-wing caricatures of Oath Keepers, I actually talked to Stewart Rhodes, and asked him what he believed.

    Crazy concept, eh?

Leave a Reply