I do like broccoli and califlower ;not asparagus... which is also in the garden this year for the 1st time. Add beets to the list I don't like and that is about it. All the other veggies I consume.
|
I do like broccoli and califlower ;not asparagus... which is also in the garden this year for the 1st time. Add beets to the list I don't like and that is about it. All the other veggies I consume.
A and C - wow. Who knew pizza was so good for you? Good news.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Brussels spouts too. Put them on the pizza for a double dose of vitamins. Even better than peas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
Dear God, save us from those who would put peas on pizza. I'm a pizza purist - the NY thin crust with the crust slightly charbroiled leaving those blackened burnt spots.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
No question about it ;there is nothing better than authentic NY pizza dripping in olive oil and the chesse so thick it slides off the slice. I'd love to see the President order a slice ,and try to fold it properly for consumption while running to catch a subway train.
NY pizza is the perfect health food . It is low in carbs because of the thin crust ;has all your food groups ,is baked ,the olive oil is a monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA). MUFA is a healthy dietary fat... and you can portion control by the slice. I add extra garlic and oregano ;and sometimes red pepper ,often extra mushrooms or green Italian peppers... more health foods .
Hello again, tom:
While OTHER Republican state legislatures are voting to CURB people's rights, last night, the NY Republicans did the opposite. They voted to take nanny OUT of the room when people propose to each other...
That should please you... Unless, of course, you don't LIKE what's going on in the room, in which case you'd want nanny right back in there... Would that apply to you?
While we're at it, do you think nanny should BE in the doctors office when a pregnant woman wants an abortion?? I think you DO.
excon
Lol ,the homosexual community demanded that the state go into their bedrooms in this case.
If they really wanted government out of the bedroom they'd champion the ending of all state sponsored marriage. The state's only interest in this is the contractual end . So let the state govern that and not take a stand on who is "married " and who isn't .
I've said it all along that this will not be resolved at the State level . What happens to these couples when they move to another state ? Are their "marriages" annulled ? Nope ;States that had no say about NY laws are Constitutionally compelled to honor it under the 'Full Faith and Credit "clause.
Also ;to get this into law the State Senate did a tap dance to exempt religious organizations from discrimination if they refuse to participate.
You know it and I know it that before a month goes by there will be challenges to that provision under the 14th Amendment. All the exemptions did was give cover to the spineless Republicans of NY who needed political cover to vote for the law. They of course will never tell you the real reason they voted for it... Bloomberg threatened to pull his $$ support to the NY Republican organization.
In other words ;it had nothing to do with defending homosexual rights ;they were bribed into it. Such is the sad state of the Republican party in my state.
As for abortions... as you know... the state should never permit the snuffing of innocent human life.Call that nanny state if you wish... I call it a legitimate role of government .
The nutrition czar's favorite food is french fries, she can't stop eating them. What do you not get? That's a habit and I repeat, you know how kids are, a role model telling them one thing and modeling something else is not good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Blechhh!Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Asparagus is so good, I have some growing in my garden this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
We don't get NY pizza here, I like to make my own. Sometime with all the cholesterol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Athos
Obama planned to spend only about two hours in Iowa. His first stop was Ross' 24-Hour Restaurant, a local diner in the town of Bettendorf. Among the president's orders was a "Magic Mountain", a house specialty that includes Texas toast and mounds of ground beef.
"I hope he brought his antacids because he said he's going to need one after," quipped Cynthia Freidhof, the daughter of the restaurant's founder.
White House insists economy, not politics, on Obama's agenda at aluminum factory in Iowa | CanadianBusiness.com
The First Lady, who has been criticised before for failing to practise what she preaches when it comes to her health food drive, made a quick stop at a small restaurant in a Botswanan village on Saturday to sample some of the local fare - fat cakes and French fries.
Michelle Obama tucks in to fat cakes and French fries on trip to Botswana | Mail Online
Yeah, you'd think that two people with all the weight they carry and all the health problems they have would know better.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Hello again, tom:
Al Gore can't fly in an airplane and Michell Obama can't feed her kids a french fry WITHOUT you or your wrong stream media complaining... Who says they're being given a pass?
Is Brietbart checking on their bathroom habits?? I'll bet he IS.
excon
With their diet I wouldn't be surprised if they were irregular.
I don't care what they eat. Just stop being pompus preachers about a healthy diet when they clearly don't practice what they preach.
If they said pig out on fried food and exercise then at least they'd be consistent . But the 1st Lady makes it a point to have one standard for us and another for her .Quote:
Yeah, you'd think that two people with all the weight they carry and all the health problems they have would know better.
Three meals a day every day are loaded with fat and "bad" foods.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
They do exercise. And they don't pig out on fried food.Quote:
If they said pig out on fried food and exercise then at least they'd be consistent .
You keep missing the point which I've made several times now. It doesn't matter that the Obama's exercise and look fit, in publicly eating unhealthy foods they're modeling bad behavior to the children while preaching something else. Besides, one doesn't need to be fat to have dangerous cholesterol levels.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Michelle already dealt with that. You've never seen them with healthy food in public?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Why are you so determined to excuse this hypocrisy being modeled in front of children?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
1) WH garden (veggies not fatback)
2) state dinner menus
3) personal exercise programs
4) frequent dog walking
5) participation in sports
6) WH chef prepares healthy food swaps and uses lean beef and low-sugar ketchup; dessert is a special treat served only on the weekends (order direct from Michelle Obama)
7) treadmill on presidential plane
8) Michelle recently demonstrated skill with hula hoop, one of her personal exercise routines
9) daughters' extracurricular activities include tennis, aerobics, dance, and football
10) WH much-used basketball court replaced tennis court
Why are you so determined to not allow healthy people some not-so-healthy food at times? The Obamas have always maintained a balance is necessary. You can't eat broccoli 24/7.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
If they looked like Chris Christy even after he had stomach stapling and who gets driven 100 yards in a limo to watch a kid's game, then, yes, I would agree with you.
I give up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
You don't see the poor pr going on here ? Michelle was talking healthy food to the kids in South Africa ,and when asked what foods she liked best she said "frys" .Quote:
Why are you so determined to not allow healthy people some not-so-healthy food at times?
What's wrong with broccoli? I would rather eat broccoli than that garbage that comproses the average hamburgerQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
I had to smile at this. Obviously the Obamas eat healthy - just look at them.
Now look at Christie. This morbidly obese man reflects his political philosophy - the fat get fatter and the poor get poorer. Redistribute the wealth - take from the poor and give to the rich.
Which is precisely what he did in New Jersey by supporting the rich at the expense of the elderly poor.
Like so many of his ilk, his sense of privilege is so great that he was clueless about using the state helicopter to go to his kid's little league game. Only after the public uproar, did he deign to agree to reimburse the taxpayers. HEY, you can't make this stuff up!
You are speaking of the Chris Christie that was born and raised in Newark NJ of Irish and Italian parents . Who went to the University of Delaware and Seton Hall eventually getting a law degree . He eventually became a US District Att. For NJ and then Governor.Quote:
Like so many of his ilk, his sense of privilege is so great...
That "privileged " "ilk".
For a minute I thought you were speaking of John Kerry who parks his yacht in another state to avoid paying Mass. Rates... or Claire McCaskill who bills the US taxpayers $76000 for her private plane use.Or Democratic Governor Jay Nixon of Missouri who has come under attack recently because he billed the State $400,000 for the cost of his junkets.
This essay speaks of Gore ,but could just as easily make the Obamas it's subject.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
The Failure of Al Gore: Part One | Via MeadiaQuote:
But you cannot be a leading environmentalist who hopes to lead the general public into a long and difficult struggle for sacrifice and fundamental change if your own conduct is so flagrantly inconsistent with the green gospel you profess. If the heart of your message is that the peril of climate change is so imminent and so overwhelming that the entire political and social system of the world must change, now, you cannot fly on private jets. You cannot own multiple mansions. You cannot even become enormously rich investing in companies that will profit if the policies you advocate are put into place.
It is not enough to buy carbon offsets (aka “indulgences”) with your vast wealth, not enough to power your luxurious mansions with exotic low impact energy sources the average person could not afford, not enough to argue that you only needed the jet so that you could promote your earth-saving film.
You are asking billions of people, the overwhelming majority of whom lack many of the basic life amenities you take for granted, people who can’t afford Whole Foods environmentalism, to slash their meager living standards. You may well be right, and those changes may be necessary — the more shame on you that with your superior insight and knowledge you refuse to live a modest life. There’s a gospel hymn some people in Tennessee still sing that makes the point: “You can’t be a beacon if your light don’t shine.”...
You can sit on ivory chairs with kings in their halls of gold, participating in the world of politics as usual, or you can live with the prophets and visionaries in the wilderness, voices of a greater truth and higher meaning that challenge the smug certainties and false assumptions of the comfortable, business as usual elites. You cannot do both...
A fawning establishment press spares the former vice president the vitriol and schadenfreude it pours over the preachers and priests whose personal conduct compromised the core tenets of their mission; Gore is not mocked as others have been. This gentle treatment hurts both Gore and the greens; he does not know just how disabling, how crippling the gap between conduct and message truly is. The greens do not know that his presence as the visible head of the movement helps ensure its political failure.
Consider how Gore looks to the skeptics. The peril is imminent, he says. It is desperate. The hands of the clock point to twelve. The seas rise, the coral dies, the fires burn and the great droughts have already begun. The hounds of Hell have slipped the huntsman’s leash and even now they rush upon us, mouths agape and fangs afoam.
But grave as that danger is, Al Gore can consume more carbon than whole villages in the developing world. He can consume more electricity than most African schools, incur more carbon debt with one trip in a private plane than most of the earth’s toiling billions will pile up in a lifetime — and he doesn’t worry. A father of four, he can lecture the world on the perils of overpopulation. Surely, skeptics reason, if the peril were as great as he says and he cares about it as much as he claims, Gore’s sense of civic duty would call him to set an example of conspicuous non-consumption. This general sleeps in a mansion, and lectures the soldiers because they want tents.
Hello again, tom:Quote:
You are asking billions of people, the overwhelming majority of whom lack many of the basic life amenities you take for granted, people who can't afford Whole Foods environmentalism, to slash their meager living standards.
I've been asking for a long time WHAT your reason is to deny climate change... I've thought it was because you owned stock... Now, I see that you believe that an admission of climate change would mean you would have to adopt the "end of American prosperity as we know it" scenario...
Well, of course, if that's true, I'd deny it too... But, you'll have to show me where Al Gore said that in order to FIX it, we have to SLASH our meager living standards.
Could you show me where they say that?? Oh, I don't mean your right wing scare merchants... I'm interested in a plan, or a proposal, or a solution, or a paper, or a notion, that says we must SLASH our living standards to FIX the problem...
I'm not saying that it's not out there.. I'm just saying I haven't read anything that says that... And, I read a LOT!
Excon
Don't eat average hamburgers, eat good hamburgers.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
I don't "deny " climate change. Climate change occures all the time . It occurred before the industrial revolution .It occurred before humans walked upright.Quote:
I've been asking for a long time WHAT your reason is to deny climate change
If you ask me if I think the hypothesis of AGW is due to human activity then I say that there is not enough evidence to support that ;and the evidence I've seen has been tainted and distorted by unscientific practices of the lead researchers of the hypothesis.
Nope. What I have said is that unless you can provide the technology to replace the use of carbon based energy then you will cause massive world wide economic disruption. Beyond that I am not opposed to research in alternative energy sources .Quote:
Now, I see that you believe that an admission of climate change would mean you would have to adopt the "end of American prosperity as we know it" scenario...
I'll go further than that . Just this month the Goracle who has a brood of 4 told us his "final [Malthusian] solution" .The rest of us should have less kids. (another example of the libs wanting to get in your bedroom).Since most Western nations have negative populations or stable population growth he must be targeting 3rd world and minority populations . Kill the poor and the non-white is the Gore final solution... he is in league with the eugenist Margaret Sanger .Quote:
But, you'll have to show me where Al Gore said that in order to FIX it, we have to SLASH our meager living standards.
Then you haven't read : Our Common Future - Brundtland Report ~ From One Earth to One World: An overview by the World Commission on Environment and Development written by United Nations World Commission on Environment and DevelopmentQuote:
I'm interested in a plan, or a proposal, or a solution, or a paper, or a notion, that says we must SLASH our living standards to FIX the problem...
I'm not saying that it's not out there.. I'm just saying I haven't read anything that says that... And, I read a LOT!
This from the summary :
http://www.wikilivres.info/wiki/Our_...h_to_One_WorldQuote:
29. Sustainable global development requires that those who are more affluent adopt life-styles within the planet's ecological means - in their use of energy, for example. Further, rapidly growing populations can increase the pressure on resources and slow any rise in living standards; thus sustainable development can only be pursued if population size and growth are in harmony with the changing productive potential of the ecosystem.
They hit on their 2 main themes in a single point... The affluent nations need to learn to live on less... and the overpopulated minorities need to be pruned .
Hello again, tom:
I asked the wrong question... Just as you can't be linked to others in your political spectrum, I can't be linked to mine. Of course, there ARE people on the left who call for a return to yurts... But, not me.
You will recall, that, as a businessman, MY solution will, not only allow us to KEEP our standards of living but it will allow us to expand upon them, just like progress has ALWAYS done.
Although I read a LOT, I DON'T read silly stuff, and announcing the end of the world is silly stuff.
excon
Agreed . However ,as the UN wastes resources publishing toilet paper ;the world governments adopt policies based on their recommendations (see Kyoto).
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Somebody has to fill the vacuum. If we don't LEAD, then we'll be stuck with what OTHERS think our fate should be...
In my view, LEADING is investing HEAVILY in new energy technology (yes, investing involves spending). You'd rather sit back and wait..
Speaking as a businessman, new technology doesn't happen if we SIT BACK.
excon
I am not opposed to spending on research .I thought I made that point already. What I am opposed to is policies like taxing the poor because they need to drive to work . I am opposed to government demand and control . If alternatives are viable then private industry will invest heavily in them .
Note all those evil major energy companies do indeed invest in R & D on alt energy because of the potential.
The U.S. oil and natural gas industry invested over $121 billion between 2000 and 2007 in emerging energy technologies, including $12 billion in non-hydrocarbons and $42 billion in greenhouse gas emission mitigation technologies. This investment represents 65% of the estimated total of $188 billion spent by U.S. based companies and the Federal government on emerging energy technologies http://illinoisenergyforum.com/myth/...-technologies-.
Chevron (CVX): $2.5 billion (2007-2009) on various projects, including algae biofuel.
ConocoPhillips (COP): Claims to be searching for wind and solar power investments.
Royal Dutch Shell (RDS-B): Focusing on thin-film solar. Joint ventures opening solar plants in Japan and Germany.
BP (BP): Plans to invest $8 billion over a decade on various initiatives from solar to wind to biofuel.
ExxonMobile (XOM): Is investing in the hybrid car market.
What Would Big Oil Invest In?
Oil Companies Invest In Biofuels - Business News - Portfolio.com
Exxon to Invest Millions to Make Fuel From Algae - NYTimes.com
Oil Companies Promote Alternative Energy
Some need to lead, some need to get the out of the way so we can take advantage of what we have instead of say, telling Brazil to drill, baby drill so we can remain dependent on foreign oil.
"What the frack is going on?"
Would that be the same UN that appointed the Norks to head a conference on disarmament?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Reason TV's Nanny of the Month isn't the FDA for their horror pictures or San Francisco for wanting to ban the sale of pets, it's Montgomery County, Maryland’s Department of Permitting Services for fining some kids $500 for not having a permit for their lemonade stand. They were trying to raise money for pediatric cancer research.
Hello again, Steve:
When I was a kid, having received my third ticket in a year, I was forced to take a defensive driving course... The FIRST thing the instructor did, was pass around a few photos...
These were REAL photos of the mayhem steel and concrete does to a human body.. I was grossed out... But, I remember those pictures. They WORKED...
You'd only be AGAINST ugly pictures on cigarette packs if you didn't care about the health of the smoker or you owned stock in Phillip Morris...
Let me ask you this... If you saw a pedestrian about to J-walk into a 10 ton truck, would you stop him?
excon
Third choice, I'm against the ugly pictures because I find it offensive that the government thinks we're stupid. But in answer to your question, of course I would. I also want ugly pictures on packs of weed once it's legalized. And why not those pics of bodies and mangled steel on beer, wine and alocohol bottles... or on wine glasses in restaurants?
Hello again, Steve:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Why not? We'd have MORE success curbing drug abuse by doing THAT, than we have by locking people up.
excon
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:44 PM. |