Tuesday, September 19, 2006

Winning Elections, Exercise, Clinton's babes, etc.

I just got through grading some exams; my differential equations class did quite well, on the whole. Of course, my first thought was "oh no, I made the exam too easy!"

I also had an interesting bike ride this morning. I went from my house to Edwards and back; roughly a 20 mile trip, which included 10 miles of neighborhood/urban riding. Out on the country roads, I made little headway when riding against the wind. Coming back though; for a moment, I had a glimpse of what things might be like for a competent cyclist. I felt wonderful!

Speaking of cycling, I remembered back to my weekend ride on the Rock Island trail. On the way out I was cheerful and waving to everyone. On the way back (against the wind) I was in pain; I tried to acknowledge people but mostly they got nods and/or grunts from me, especially when I got very tired. That reminded me of this exchange from one of my sports e-mail groups:

Mawk wrote (Mawk is an ironman triathlete who has a strong bike leg)

I'm not sure what the deal is with roadies v. tri setups...
On the local email-list and the website they try to promote
comradarie and such, but, for example, on Tuesday's ride, I was at the back of
the pack (peleton) when another biker passed heading in the opposite
direction riding on aerobars, he waved, and from my vantage point I
could see that none of the roadies waved back, save me.
I guess that's why I like dusting as many of them as I can on these
club rides. (Not to say that some of them don't dust me)

Dave (an accomplished ironman athlete) replied:

Mawk's observations seem very common in biker groups. Without exception,
bikers are the biggest group of pompous arrogant assholes I have ever met.

There is a group of national class riders around here who also happen to be
triathletes that have been known to wave at the packs of "pure riders". When
there is the cold shoulder, the group turns around and rides with the bikers
and just abuses them, yelling what douchbags people are thinking they are too
good to acknowledge others then pull away from them looking back saying they
suck. Its AWESOME...

I still chuckle when I think about that.

Cartoons:
click to see larger versions

A note about the Lio cartoon: I've always joked about how strong rabbits are; they are, in fact, my favorite animal.
Every time I pass a golf course and see fat people waddling out of their carts I think of this Frazz cartoon.


Sara Goudarzi
LiveScience Staff Writer
LiveScience.comTue Sep 19, 4:00 PM ET

Lack of time is no longer an excuse for not working out, suggests a new but relatively small study.

Scientists split a group of 16 college-aged students into two groups, each one performing a different exercise schedule for two weeks.

Eight students cycled four to six times for 30-seconds separated by four minutes of recovery daily, while the other group cycled for 90 to 120 minutes each day. At the end of the two weeks, the first group had only exercised 2.5 hours total, and the second group had performed 10.5 hours of training. Yet both groups showed similar health improvements.

Participants of both groups had similar muscle glycogen contents. Glycogen is a sugar molecule that is readily converted to glucose to supply the body with energy during heavy work. Synthesis of glycogen is usually greater after exercise. The researchers also found that improvements in muscle parameters associated with fatigue resistance were similar in all subjects.

"The most striking finding from our study was the remarkably similar improvements in muscle health and performance induced by two such diverse training strategies," said Martin Gibala, an associate professor of kinesiology at McMaster University in Canada.

Exercising helps lower blood pressure, improves the cardiovascular system, and reduces the chance of illnesses such as cancer and diabetes. The busy lives of many people, however, prevent them from being active.

Such exercise could be a time-efficient training strategy, Gibala added. “This type of training is very demanding and requires a high level of motivation. However, short bursts of intense exercise may be an effective option for individuals who cite ‘lack of time’ as a major impediment to fitness."

The findings are detailed in the September issue of the Journal of Physiology.


Yet More Reasons why we Democrats Lose Elections.

We can't stand to have a winning political issue. Gas prices: yes, they have come down recently. So, it would be a good idea to accuse the Republicans of cynically manipulating gas prices so as to make big oil more profitable only to lower prices around election time, right?

Well, on the Kos, someone had to open their big mouth:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/9/17/153931/471

There is NO manipulation of gas prices. An explanation Hotlist

by Jerome a Paris [Subscribe]

Sun Sep 17, 2006 at 12:39:31 PM PDT

The sharp drop in gas prices in recent weeks has given birth to many diaries or comments suggesting that this is a BigOil pre-electoral trick (too many to link to, in fact). I'd like, with the help of HiD, a former oil trader, to guide you through the explanations as to what is happening, which is perfectly understandable under normal market mechanisms under the current international context.

A first point to note is that gas prices rose in 2004 right up to the election, and dropped just afterwards (look at this graph, upside down if you don't believe it), so there was no manipulation of that kind in 2004.

[...]

The diary goes on to give a detailed explanation of what is going on and concludes:

Back to gasoline: it's not the oil market players that rule the gasoline market.

I hope that this shows clearly enough that there are very real market reasons for the current price drop. To simplify things further: speculators bet that there would be problems during the summer, and bought gasoline paper. That drove prices up during the summer. When it appeared that the problems did not materialise and there was excess gasoline (real or paper) in September, the speculators had to fold, and sell at a big loss.

But that's the point of speculation: you bet on uncertain events. This one was not an unreasonable bet in view of last years events, but it did not work out.

What this isn't is market manipulation by Bigoil.
&*^%$!! Democrats! We can't just let an issue be a political winner for us, can we?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/9/18/75734/0480

Quit Thinking Like a Democrat!!!! Hotlist

by Richard Cranium [Subscribe]

Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 04:57:34 AM PDT

Yesterday, Jerome a Paris provided a well written, technical, market-based explanation for the rapid drop in gasoline prices over the past few weeks. It's an article of faith for many Kossaks that, when it comes to energy issues, Jerome is the go-to guy.

Without passing judgement on the merits of his explanation, I have the following message for all residents of the reality-based community:

Quit thinking like a Democrat!!!

Before we start trying to intelligently explain complicated issues, we've got to learn to talk to the reptile. You can't play nice or sensible, and the average 'murkin don't want facts and figures and fancypants graphs. They want a message. On gas prices, here's one:

THE GOP IS MANIPULATING GAS PRICES AND THEY HAVE SCREWED YOU BADLY.

That's the message we need to send. Plain and simple, simple or even (gasp!) lacking in truthiness though it may be. Fuck. When are we ever gonna learn? Again, you can't talk sense and sensibility and facts and figures.

IT'S THE GOP AND THEIR BIG OIL PATRON'S FAULT.

Jesus. Get a clue. It's not conspiracy. It's talking to the reptile. It's called reinforcing preconceived notions. You don't think the gas price issue hasn't been a topic of conversation around every dinner table in America over the past week or two? And you know who they're blaming? The GOP!!! So here's another message:

LIKE LOWER GAS PRICES? THANK A DEMOCRAT.

There. Now, was that so friggin' hard? Jeez.


Of course, there are other reasons we lose and some suggestions on how to change for the better:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/9/18/112339/632

"Twelve Traps to Avoid" By George Lakoff and the Rockridge Institute Hotlist

by Rockridge [Subscribe]

Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 08:23:39 AM PDT

For progressives to succeed in taking back this country, we need to stay true to our values and communicate them effectively. To accomplish this mission, we need to be aware of the traps that have often tripped up progressives in the past.

In this preview of the new book, Thinking Points: Communicating Our American Values and Vision, A Progressive's Handbook by George Lakoff and the Rockridge Institute, we present twelve traps to avoid as we make our case to restore an America that is true to its best principles.

Twelve Traps to Avoid
Visit the diary to see the list of tweleve traps; here is one of them:

8. The "Misunderestimating" Trap

Too many progressives think that people who vote conservative are just stupid, especially those who vote against their economic self-interest. Progressives believe that we only have to tell them the real economic facts, and they will change the way they vote. The reality is that those who vote conservative have their reasons, and we had better understand them. Conservative populism is cultural--not economic--in nature. Conservative populists see themselves as oppressed by elitist liberals who look down their noses at them, when they are just ordinary, moral, right-thinking folks. They see liberals as trying to impose an immoral "political correctness" on them, and they are angry about it.

Progressives also paint conservative leaders as incompetent and not very smart, based on a misunderstanding of the conservative agenda. This results from looking at conservative goals through progressive values. Looking at conservative goals through conservative values yields insight and shows just how effective conservatives really are.

I know that I've been guilty of this.

And speaking of guilty: the DLC has gotten their tax-exempt status revoked. They tried to claim that they were non-partisan, because MORE REPUBLICANS THAN DEMOCRATS backed their ideas! Gee, we've been saying that all along!

For those who might be confused, here is a brief outline: the DLC is a place for the centrist Democrats; one of the more famous of these is Hillary Clinton and another is Joe Lieberman. Many progressives consider the DLC to be "Republican Lite". A good primer for progressive thought on the DLC can be found here:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050321/berman.

Another Atheism Article
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/731

Here is part of what this article says:

Here's Martin Lewis on Islam: "When was the last time agnostics or atheists got offended and went on the rampage when someone trashed - or even questioned - their beliefs?"

You could've said the same thing about blacks after the Los Angeles riots, couldn't you? "When was the last time white people got offended and went on the rampage when someone got let off for a crime against them?"

I'm not defending rioters. I'm simply pointing out some inherent biases in the comment. Ultra-Orthodox Jews have rioted in Israel, and one of them killed the peacemaking Prime Minister. Christians have rioted, too. People tend to riot because they feel powerless, not because they're inherently evil. (Killing's another matter - it's always indefensible.)

And less than one Muslim in 43,000 has ever participated in a riot. (I did the math in a previous post.) Far more Americans have been child molesters, percentage-wise, yet it would be bigotry to say we live in a nation of pederasts.

I don't know if Martin's an atheist or not, but this is a trick of anti-religionists who ride a wave of fear - to make insinuations that only Muslims have engaged in this sort of behavior. It smacks of piling on to a hate-fest against a persecuted minority in the west.

A study released today showed a 30% increase in anti-Muslim hate crimes in the U.S. between 2004 and 2005. The innocent victims of these crimes are being persecuted because of misunderstanding, fear, and hate. Is this really the kind of climate progressive atheists want to help engender?

This piece is particularly disappointing to me, given Martin's moving reflection on 9/11 and Cat Stevens. I'm a longtime admirer of Martin's work, and therefore that much sorrier to see him engage in this kind of rhetoric.

Martin, I hope you'll reconsider. (Sam won't; he's got a new book to sell.) Check out this video of hardliner Communists rioting in Russia in 1993. (Note: the video's accompanied by loud Russian punk music.) They're angry because the new government is dismantling their treasured system. Every single one of these rioters is an avowed atheist.

"But," some will say, "they're not rioting because they're atheists. They're rioting because they have other grievances, or because that's what people do over there when they're unhappy -- or maybe just because they're difficult people."

Right. Same with Muslims. Despite what the haters say, belief in forced conversions and the like is not intrinsic to Islam. Neither is terrorism or rioting. Those behaviors are based on other beliefs, issues, and motivations. Just as with Christians, or Jews, or other groups.

Harris' variation on this theme is to describe somebody about to blow up a roomful of innocent people, then asking you to guess their probable religion. "Muslim" is the expected answer - one that's accurate today. Thirty years ago, however, the answer would have been "atheist," because most terrorists were Communist members of the Red Army Faction and the Baader Meinhof gang.

Sixty-plus years ago the answer might have been "Jewish," during the days of the Stern Gang in Palestine. Even today, the answer could also be "Christian," since Christians have blown up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City and abortion clinics. (Some say the anthrax terror hunt came too close to the extreme right and that's why the Administration dropped it - although, to be fair to them, they couldn't catch Bin Laden either.)

One note: McVeigh admitted in an interview that he was really more agnostic than anything. That is one of the few times I've learned anything truthful of value at Redstate.org.

A Bit of Fun with Bill Clinton
See the following photo:



Where is the controversy? Click the photo to see a larger version. Notice that the woman in front of President Clinton HAS BREASTS and is wearing a snug top!

Kind of reminds me of Katherine Harris, actually, but never mind.

Anyway, Bill Dennis (aka Peoria Pundit) has an nice reply to this so-called controversy here:

http://peoriapundit.com/blogpeoria/2006/09/17/posers-galore-in-clinton-photo-controversy/

posted by Harriet at 9/19/2006 06:29:00 PM

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home