Before considering this new tradition, let us not forget the greatest tradition of this holiday, taking time to count our blessings and give thanks for all that has transpired in the last year. While my blogging activity has been limited recently, I did not want to miss this opportunity to offer this holiday greeting and a wish for a Happy Thanksgiving to the extended Donk family.

I have much to be thankful for…

I am thankful that Justin continues to permit me to be a contributor to Donklephant, so I can annoy many more partisans than I can reach from my little blog.

I am thankful for all the bloggers, columnists, and pundits that helped me to understand and appreciate the significance of Barack Obama’s election one year ago. I learned that with that election we ushered in a new post-partisan, permanent realignment of the American political landscape. I learned that the United States was actually a center-left country. I learned that the Republican Party if not already dead was doomed to succumb to the inevitable demographic shifts in the populace and that ideas like fiscal restraint are so last century and irrelevant.

Having learned all of this from the 2008 election we can only assume that the recent 2009 GOP gubernatorial victories in New Jersey and Virginia are attributable to the last spasms of a dying GOP corpse. In that context I am thankful to Professor Jacobson’s penetrating analysis of the 2009 race:

I am thankful that as we turn our eyes to the 2010 midterms, the prospect for and value of divided government is once again getting its due from the political chattering class, and there is hope for divided government and fiscal sanity to get “more votes” in 2010 and beyond.

Back to the new Thanksgiving tradition of plucking, stuffing, skewering and carving up the value of our currency. For this, we can be thankful to Barack Obama, Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke and single party Democratic rule. I am personally thankful for CNBC, a network that, while certainly not immune to political bias, offers the depth of coverage to afford some understanding of our government policies and the real consequences for the economy, jobs, the dollar, our standard of living and the future of our country. Case in point – this week on CNBC I learned about the consequences of devaluing our currency by printing money to service unprecedented debt created by fiscally irresponsible spending that started in the Bush administration and has accelerated to unprecedented levels under Obama:

I am also thankful for Peter Schiff, who was right in 2006, was right in 2008 again and again, and who now tells us what to expect in 2010 and beyond. Three for three??

Finally, I am really thankful for this clip from SNL, which is quite possibly the single best bit that they have ever done:

Just get it over with!

Happy Thanksgiving.

]]> http://donklephant.com/2009/11/26/thanksgiving-tradition-precedented-and-un/feed/ 0 http://donklephant.com/2009/07/26/case-studies-in-the-politics-of-food-and-choice-eggs-salt/ http://donklephant.com/2009/07/26/case-studies-in-the-politics-of-food-and-choice-eggs-salt/#comments Sun, 26 Jul 2009 22:24:37 +0000 Solomon Kleinsmith http://donklephant.com/?p=15845

I stumbled across an interesting article on eggs yesterday while sitting in Borders reading up on something I’m going to be doing an in depth series of posts on. Apparently a study at the USDA has shown that factory farm eggs are far less nutritious than pastured eggs. I don’t know what causes this… although one can imagine the havoc that living in a cage your entire life that is barely bigger than your body, having your beak cut off and breathing in air so foul your whole life that people need to wear an environmental suit when they go in to the building you live in would do to your body and what it produces.

The numbers are quite compelling. Chickens that are let out to pasture produce eggs with:

1/3 less cholesterol
1/4 less saturated fat
2/3 more vitamin A
Two times more omega-3 fatty acids
Three time more vitamin E
Seven times more beta carotene
Three to six times more vitamin D

Now some would take these numbers and offer the idea that we should only allow these kinds of eggs to market. I would disagree, although it would seem fair to require that the difference in nutritional value be prominently placed on packaging. I think people should know exactly what they are getting. Eggs provide a cheap source of protein, and helped me afford that necessary part of my diet through a period where I was low on money, but now that this isn’t an issue, I will certainly switch.

In related news, a New Jersey man is suing Denny’s over the high salt content in their food. I’ve read a handful of articles about this, and I’m still confused as to what exactly he is suing over. As far as I know there is no law that requires restaurants to disclose the salt content of their meals, and frankly, when I eat out at a low quality chain restaurant like that I accept the fact that I’m going to get something cheap that is probably pretty terrible for me. I fail to understand what law they are breaking by offering these foods, and while I completely agree that it is a good idea to have nutritional information for customers (potentially on the menu), it strikes me as something that should be  proposed through the legislature, not forced through by judicial fiat.

So what do you think about this?

Should a customer be able to sue a restaurant because its food is unhealthy?

What should labeling be required to show, and where should it be placed?

We overeat. It’s that simple.

Oh, sure, we could probably exercise more and eat more fiber and all that, but, after looking at and studying this issue for years, I’m pretty sure the solution to the American obesity problem is for everyone to eat less.

Unfortunately, that’s not as easy as it sounds – not when you consider that portion sizes have exploded over the last 20 years.

For instance, bagels have ballooned from 140 calories to 350 calories.

The standard turkey sandwich has gone from 320 calories to 820 calories.

And this is true for most of our favorite meals.

Cheap food and the general business belief that more is better has escalated portion sizes to unreasonable levels. Sure, self-control is a big factor, but when the standard cheeseburger has gone from 333 calories to 590 calories, it’s easy to see how a lot of people have become overweight.

Unfortunately, an easy solution does not present itself. Regulating portion size would be insane and the market has already proved bigger is better. So, nutritional education is the only obvious solution – and that is hardly a surefire method.

Still, it’s worth trying.

We all know that Americans have put on a little weight over the last few decades. The solution, we hear, is to exercise more and eat less. Well, a new study suggests that, really, eating less is the only viable option.

It seems we’re not much less active now than we were in the 1970s. So how can we hope to return to those leaner days?:

[C]hildren would have to cut their intake by about 350 calories a day — equal to one can of fizzy drink and a small portion of French fries, and adults by about 500 calories — the equivalent of a Big Mac burger.

Alternatively, children would have to walk for an extra two-and-a-half hours a day, and adults for nearly two hours.

Exercise is still useful in losing weight. But since few of us have the time for a two hour walk, I suppose putting down this Big Mac might be a better start.

A recent study on how being overweight affects health showed a link between even modest weight gain and an increased risk for heart failure. The study, which tracked the health of over 21,000 male doctors, found that for every extra seven pounds gained, the risk of heart failure rose by 11 percent over the next 20 years.

What does this mean? Maybe we should hold off on that extra piece of Christmas fudge. Or we could just exercise more.

The same study also found that men who exercised as little as one to three times a month lowered their risk for heart disease by 18 percent.

Just something to consider in this season of gluttony joy.

On Wednesday, New York’s Governor David Patterson unveiled a proposed $121-billion budget for next year, which includes a barrage or 88 new or higher taxes and fees to help close a $15.4-billion gap. Among the new revenue raisers are an “I-Pod tax” on downloaded music, sales taxes on cable and satellite TV, new taxes on movie tickets, taxi rides, beer, wine, cigars and massages, and my favorite, an “obesity tax” on sugared soda. So lay off the Coke, unless it’s sugar free. The Governor says it’s bad for you.

An astonishing number of otherwise sensible people have jumped in to agree with Patterson that the approximately 18% tax on Coke, Pepsi and Dr. Pepper with sugar is just what the doctor ordered so that New Yorkers can shed the zillion pounds of fat we’re carrying around.

New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof opined instantly to the effect that sugary drinks are the new cigarettes. Whereas “some scholars believe they have become a major source of obesity,” he wrote, a daily dose of root beer will kill you dead. One such concerned scholar he relies on is — I could not make this up — “Barry Popkin, a nutrition specialist at the University of North Carolina and author of the excellent new book, ‘The World Is Fat’.”

Here’s the thing about all this: like millions of other Americans, I’ve been trying to lose — or keep off — some ugly, unwanted fat for years. But the number of sugared sodas I drank in the past three decades you could count on your fingers. I don’t need no damn Coke to stay fat! Give me ice cream, pasta, potatoes, fried chicken, candy, pie, cake, cookies, tarts, Danishes, bagels with cream cheese, ribs dripping with sauce, quiche, Big Macs, turkey with dressing, eggs benedict, more gravy, extra helpings — and I can manage to stay quite fat enough, thank you.

Thanks to Mayor Bloomberg, I already have to read the number of calories contained in every Starbucks muffin I buy. Now, the handwriting is on the wall:

– First they taxed Coke, and I said nothing, because I didn’t drink Coke.

– Then, they rationed donuts, and I said nothing, because I don’t like donuts.

– Then, they banned Big macs, and I said nothing, because I can live without McDonalds.

– Then, finally??? I dunno where it all ends.

But I’m getting hungry.  I need to go get a snack.

(Visit me at The Purple Center)