Archive

Archive for March, 2012

Right, left, center

March 26th, 2012 No comments

I promised this last week, but I’ve been working on it fairly constantly, whenever time allowed, for like 9 days and still I’m not terribly happy with it. I suspect this is because I’m not a particularly astute political observer, and certainly not an effective journalist/commenter. Read on with the fair warning that I really don’t know what I’m talking about, and can’t organize my thoughts into coherence.


I realized something interesting about the current state of the Republican Party. The current batch of Presidential candidates like to call themselves conservative, even though they’re really just Fascism Lite. Their supposed concern for the outrageous size of government is betrayed by their wish for a massive defense establishment (controlled, behind-the-scenes, by defense contractor lobbyists) and for careful monitoring of uteruses and bedrooms (which would obviously require more government employees to do). It’s hard to see how a true small-government, free-market conservative can get behind them. What I would describe as a “true conservative” is really just a libertarian, folks who don’t believe in government interference in much of anything, because usually (though obviously not always) they are relatively well-to-do and stand to lose a lot by being overtaxed and usually don’t much care what other people are up to. They often have religious objections to abortion, and usually have the facts wrong about the effects of drug use on the country as a whole, but otherwise if people keep to themselves they don’t see a reason to interfere.


The average Santorum or Gingrich supporter is a more complicated animal; usually not as well-versed in their Keynes and Adam Smith, they understand only a few basic “facts:” lower taxes means more money in their pockets, deficit spending will lead to national insolvency, and the truly needy just need to work harder. I’ve found that young white males, without regard to location of origin or economic background, hew closely to these beliefs. As they age, however, these men split into two groups: those who come to realize that a balanced budget is largely useless without a progressive tax system and some safety net to keep our poorest citizens fed and clothed, and those whose youthful beliefs go unchallenged for the remainder of their lives. This divergence is based largely on upbringing.


A young man who is working hard and achieving success will frequently assume that the only barrier to wealth is the ability to do that hard work. The Libertarian idea of “Every man for himself!” will be very enticing for him. Why should he be prevented from gathering as much money and toys as he can, just because others won’t work as hard? Why should he have to pay more in taxes just because poor people can’t be bothered to get a job? And so, he reads his WorldNetDaily emails, and nods his head knowingly when Presidential candidates talk about how they’ll cut entitlements and get rid of ObamaCare.


The problem is, eventually one of those politicians will argue against gay marriage, or call women “sluts” because they would like their healthcare to pay for contraception, and this is where the divergence starts. If that young man was raised in a household where homosexuality is not tolerated, or one where the only acceptable form of safe sex was complete abstinence, he will continue nodding. If he or several of his relatives are veterans, he will hear about defense cuts and become enraged. If his parents routinely complained about lazy Mexicans and freeloading blacks, he will hear an African American man described as a “food stamp President” and then he’s hooked: anything that MSNBC says is a lie, and anything Fox News says must be truth.


But if the young man raised to believe that what people in the bedroom is their own business, he will stop nodding and say, “Wait…what did you say? That’s crazy.” And he’s wondering what other things might’ve been lies. This is roughly the path I took; I am still a registered Libertarian, in fact, and retain certainly very non-Democratic Party beliefs about gun rights, among other things. But when GOP mouthpieces rail about President Obama’s deficit spending without mentioning the previous administration’s unfunded wars, tax cuts, and entitlement programs, how can one take them seriously? When a Republican candidate for President complains that allowing two women to marry one another is an infringement on his religious rights, how does one not conclude that he’s had a serious break with reality? How often can one hear so-called conservatives insist that the only route out of a bad economy is to give money back to rich people (so they can then give it to poor people, without any evidence that they actually do so), before wondering “Wait…wouldn’t it be more effective to cut out the middle man and just give the cash directly to the poor people?”


The best that we can hope for is, frankly, that the sort of child-rearing that leads to racism and homophobia is dying out, but I don’t believe it’ll happen in my lifetime. The fact that there exist intelligent and rational people, my age and younger, who believe that gay people should not be allowed to marry each other, is a little frightening. It’s also disheartening to realize that the GOP wouldn’t be sprinting to the right if they didn’t believe that enough of a fundamentalist base exists to be a significant voting bloc. What I hope is happening is that the average American is moving to the left as the extreme right-wing slowly but surely dies out, and the extreme right-wing is simply growing louder as they shrink. The moans of a dying demographic. Hopefully, eventually all that will remain are the Duggars and the Phelpses, screaming about biblical literalism, while the rest of us shake our heads and wonder “Remember when we had actual national debates about contraception and gay marriage? What the hell was wrong with us?”


A more distressing possibility is, since right-wing families tend to have far more children than left-wing, the demographic is actually growing, or, more likely, we’ve reached a balance wherein the number of extra children produced by Christian fundamentalists is roughly equal to the number of children who realize their parents are nuts and break the cycle (usually by moving to New York and becoming baristas and/or sculptors). Which means we could be having these kind of debates for centuries. And what a pleasant thought THAT is.

Categories: politickin' Tags:

Gryffindor

March 19th, 2012 No comments

Hey all, no post today, ’cause I’ve been working on something Big and Political that I’ll post tomorrow or Wednesday. Spoiler: Republicans do not come off well. In the meantime, I figured you’d like to know the following important fact: I’m a Gryffindor, baby.


Which Hogwarts house will you be sorted into?


Surprising, right? You’d think a guy with the nickname “That Leviathan” would be in Slytherin. I guess the Sorting Hat really does take your choice into account.


Gryffind0r 4 LYFE.

Through The Night

March 12th, 2012 3 comments

This will have to be quick ’cause you know how time be all CRAY CRAY. So, two things: the first, a fitness update, and the second, the greatest music video produced since Journey’s “Separate Ways“.


I spent about 6 weeks eating very few carbs and a great many hunks of meat and cheese, a diet that has worked well for me in the past, and did so again, sort of; I lost about 20 pounds in those 6 weeks, but unfortunately, lifting weights without any carbs to help rebuild muscle suuuuuuucks. My strength dropped rather precipitously (after squatting 347.5 pounds for 5 solid reps in January, I’ve been having trouble with 315, and anything above 250 or so feels dangerously heavy). My bench press has dropped about 15 pounds as well, and after hitting 405 pounds on the deadlift for 5 reps a few weeks ago I was able to lift it exactly once during last Wednesday’s workout.


So, ’tis time for a change. After doing some googlin’, I decided to go with the LeanGains diet that Martin Berkhan came up with. It’s an “intermittent fasting” plan that involves 16 hours a day of not eating anything (o nooooes) and 8 hours of getting the nutrition you need. You then cycle your intake so you take in a bunch of carbs and protein on workout day to keep muscle mass, and eat at a significant deficit on rest days to keep fat loss rolling. If it works as advertised, I should be able to lose about a pound of fat a week and keep all my pretty musckles that I’ve worked so hard to develop. I started on Saturday, and I can report that the deficit days are somewhat difficult, particularly on a weekend when there’s Happenings happening that usually involve food and booze, but I managed to be fairly good and not blow out my intake. The whole “not eating until after noon” thing actually HELPS, once you get used to it, because then instead of 3 small meals, you get 2 larger ones. Supposedly after a week or so, your body just gets used to not having breakfast, and stops signaling you to eat in the morning. I’m interested to see how that works out, what with my love of donuts and pastries and eggs and…sob…bacon.


Workout day is great, of course. After not eating all morning, I worked out over lunch and got back to work and ate 2 pork chops, a big bag of broccoli, a turkey sammich, an apple, a bag of potato chips, and a huge cup of milk and protein. Total caloric intake: 1900 calories. 206g of protein. I was so full I thought I might asplode.


I’m also switching workout programs; the Madcow 5×5 routine is probably a great workout when you’re eating enough to gain weight, but it’s nearly unbearable when you’re trying to cut fat. Too much volume, and with the ramping sets, you get pretty worn out by the time you hit the max weight. The aforementioned Martin (read the LeanGains site, it’s super informative) recommends something called “RPT,” or Reverse Pyramid Training. The idea is that if you ramp your sets upwards, hitting your max only on the last set, you’ve already tired yourself out and won’t be able to lift the biggest weight as well (exactly what was happening with me on Madcow). Since the biggest weight is theoretically the most important set, Martin advises you lift it FIRST (after a few easy warmup sets, of course), and then back the weight off for 1 or 2 subsequent sets. You’re more likely to get all your reps that way, since you haven’t blown out all your energy on lesser weights. Since the muscles are pretty glycogen-depleted (as a result of not eating anything all morning), they don’t have enough energy, and getting the hardest work done first is the best way to achieve, if not muscle gain, at least minimal muscle loss.


I can report it works pretty well, although I have to admit that after squatting 315 for 5 reps earlier, the thought of taking off 30 pounds and then doing a set of 6, followed by taking off another 30 and doing a set of 7, did not please me. I survived, however, so I’ll add more weight for the next workout and see how things feel.


Okay, enough of that nonsense. This, right here, is the top video of 2012 as voted by a Team of Professionals, consisting of me and some of my friends and relatives.


Categories: rolling with the fatness, wtf Tags:

Donut Architecture

March 6th, 2012 1 comment

I’m a day late (and, per usual, a dollar short) again, without the excuse of extreme illness, but this is a topic so important that it took an extra day. Pray forgive.


I was texting some of the folks in my fantasy league yesterday, making fun of some of the other folks in my fantasy league for bad draft strategies (Jesus Montero? Really?), when one of us dropped the strange phrase, “A was man said…if they wanna live in a donut, let ’em live in a donut!” I replied “Dammit, now I want a donut,” and was immediately asked, “What kind of donut would you live in?”


I was struck dumb. A more important question had never been posed to me, and I include “Matthew, do you take this woman to be your wife?” in that statement. What kind of donut would live in? I couldn’t answer right away, because it’s all complicated, and whatnot. I knew I had to blog a post about it. (I considered, in fact, starting an entirely new blog just to discuss the question and its attendant theories and research, but I simply haven’t the time.)


It’s not as simple as just “What is your favorite donut?” which of course is a question that could spawn thousands of graduate dissertations and a massive 3-day conference at a major university (either Harvard, or anywhere south of the Mason-Dixon that’s reasonably near a Krispy Kreme franchise). But that’s a good place to start. What is my favorite donut? A standard chocolate frosted from Dunkin Donuts has always been my go-to, but so much depends on mood. In the autumn months, the strong cinnamon notes of an are really the only way to go. I certainly won’t turn down a regular chocolate cake, nor what is invariably termed the “Manager’s Special,” which is essentially a Boston Creme (chocolate frosted, custard filled) except that the filling is standard white sugar frosting.


(We no longer have a Krispy Kreme nearby, so we shall not speak of their luscious hot glazed treats. We shall also ignore the bakery that makes the finest donuts in the world, the Fractured Prune, for two reasons: 1. they also have no franchise in northern Delaware, and 2. no human could survive living in one because the aroma and flavor of the walls would drive him mad.)


“Favorites” aside, there are many things to consider. Let’s be clear: we are intending to make this donut our home! Does this mean that we are better served with a standard donut, defined as “a donut with a big-A hole in the middle,” since otherwise, where would we stand, and put our fine antiques? Or are we better served with a filled donut, operating under the assumption that the contents would simply be consumed before, or even during, the move-in process? I lean towards the latter, for the simple reason that a filled donut, carefully emptied of its interior, would have a roof, and a regular donut has a big hole in the center and you’d get wet when it rained.


My choices for filled donuts are the “Manager’s Special,” the “Apple Crumb,” and I’ll even throw in a nice powdered chocolate-filled. I believe we are forced to eliminate the latter two out of hand, because both crumbs and powder would respond poorly to rain, whereas a well-sealed chocolate glaze should be able to keep moisture at bay for at least a few days.


My choice, in the end, is the “Manager’s Special.” I would simply eat the cream filling, slightly enlarge the hole so that my piano could fit through it, and move in. Of course, if you are averse to white cream and prefer custard, the Boston Creme is another viable option.


You might think a jelly-filled donut might be best. You might be an idiot.

Categories: foodieness, musings Tags: