Making Statements

Via a Facebook friend comes this story out of Florida. Seems like a medical specialist has decided to exercise his rights of freedom to associate, freedom of speech and the free market to make his sentiments on Obamacare known in no uncertain terms. He's advised Obama and "healthcare reform" supporters to take their business elsewhere. He doesn't want their monetary support and is willing to forgo having them as customers, as is his right. I do have to wonder, tho if he's taking this to its logical conclusion. If he's against socialised medicine does he still accept Medicare and Medicaid? They're are just as damaging as Obamacare and worked as the cornerstones for the latest depredation. I am glad to see that someone does understand the concept of shunning, tho. It's something we could all do that loses us nothing in the long run. If we all practiced it the world would be a much nicer place and people would have to either change or face the prospect of their neighbours refusing to associate with them.

MOUNT DORA — A doctor who considers the national health-care overhaul to be bad medicine for the country posted a sign on his office door telling patients who voted for President Barack Obama to seek care "elsewhere."

"I'm not turning anybody away — that would be unethical," Dr. Jack Cassell, 56, a Mount Dora urologist and a registered Republican opposed to the health plan, told the Orlando Sentinel on Thursday. "But if they read the sign and turn the other way, so be it."

The sign reads: "If you voted for Obama … seek urologic care elsewhere. Changes to your healthcare begin right now, not in four years."

The Proof Is In The Pudding And The Soda

I, and many others beside, have been saying for years that the so-called "obesity epidemic" and the fattening of America could be lain at the feet of High Fructose Corn Syrup. Manufacturers have poo-pooed the idea that this was true, despite the mounting evidence to the contrary. Well, now comes some serious evidence from researchers at Princeton University that shines a light on the HFCS conundrum and it doesn't bode well for the supporters of HFCS.
From Princeton

A Princeton University research team has demonstrated that all sweeteners are not equal when it comes to weight gain: Rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup gained significantly more weight than those with access to table sugar, even when their overall caloric intake was the same.

In addition to causing significant weight gain in lab animals, long-term consumption of high-fructose corn syrup also led to abnormal increases in body fat, especially in the abdomen, and a rise in circulating blood fats called triglycerides. The researchers say the work sheds light on the factors contributing to obesity trends in the United States.

"Some people have claimed that high-fructose corn syrup is no different than other sweeteners when it comes to weight gain and obesity, but our results make it clear that this just isn't true, at least under the conditions of our tests," said psychology professor Bart Hoebel, who specializes in the neuroscience of appetite, weight and sugar addiction. "When rats are drinking high-fructose corn syrup at levels well below those in soda pop, they're becoming obese -- every single one, across the board. Even when rats are fed a high-fat diet, you don't see this; they don't all gain extra weight."

Vindication feels good. Now, perhaps, the manufacturers will pay heed and start to remove this unnecessary sweetener from their products and replace it with sugar, (preferably cane sugar). Those manufacturers who have already done that have met with no small amount of success. PepsiCo's "Throwback" lineup has been a rousing success. Premium sodas made with sugar are selling like gangbusters, where they're available. There is a serious market there and people are more than willing to forgo HFCS for sugar.
If we can get the government to drop import restrictions and their price support and subsidy system we'll not only be healthier, we'll have access to tastier snack foods. What we don't want, or need it the government poking their super-sized proboscis into things. The market, backed by science is capable of making the right choice. Let's hope this latest science spurs a move away from HFCS, (which doesn't taste that good) to old fashioned sugar as the sweetener of choice.

Better Late Than Never?

We finally have confirmation that the Iraq Invasion was a "horrible mistake", via Republican representatives Dana Rohrbacher and Tom McClintock. At a recent Cato gathering they came right out and said that they and a good many of their Republicrat allies are now willing to admit that the war they so vociferously supported was a mistake. It really is too bad that their mistake has cost the lives of thousands of American soldiers and lives of uncountable thousands of Iraqi men, women and children. This is the kind of "mistake" that no sane individual can afford to make. If these people truly recognised that they had committed this type of "mistake" the least they could do would be to resign their office and return to their homes in shame. I'm not looking for that to happen anytime soon. People like this have no shame.

Two GOP congressmen say most Republicans on the Hill now believe the Iraq war was a mistake, and "more than half the Republican caucus" believes the way in which the US entered the Afghanistan war was also a mistake.

Reps. Tom McClintock (R-CA) and Dana Rohrbacher (R-CA) made the comments at a discussion panel at the Cato Institute on Thursday.

Going into Iraq "was a mistake because I thought we had to finish the job in Afghanistan," Rohrbacher told the panel, echoing a popular Democratic talking point at the time.

"In retrospect, almost all of us think that was a horrible mistake," Rohrbacher said. "Now that we know that it cost a trillion dollars, and all of these years, and all of these lives, and all of this blood … all I can say is everyone I know thinks it was a mistake to go in now.”

There's a video at the source or via Youtube of their confessions.

Tax The Internet!

At least that's what one Microsoft executive has suggested. He would like a tax imposed on internet users to fund cyber-security measures.

A top Microsoft executive on Tuesday suggested a broad Internet tax to help defray the costs associated with computer security breaches and vast Internet attacks, according to reports.

Speaking at a security conference in San Francisco, Microsoft Vice President for Trustworthy Computing Scott Charney pitched the Web usage fee as one way to subsidize efforts to combat emerging cyber threats -- a costly venture, he said, but one that had vast community benefits. "You could say it's a public safety issue and do it with general taxation," Charney noted.

I find that interesting considering that the majority of problems on the internet seem to be with Windows based machines being attacked. I use a Mac, (and have for many years) and have never experienced a virus, trojan or malware of any type. Apple seems to make a machine that doesn't require extra security. Hmmm...maybe they'll exempt us Mac users from their taxation scheme. Naw. They'll likely want us to pay more.