Thursday, June 11, 2009

Better Health... or else

Obama orders you to exercise, and eat right, too.

No, not really.
But eventually the Supreme Holy One just might do that.


I run because I care about my health. It's the only significant exercise I get. I certainly don't run because I like it. I don't. Many (most?) people don't like exercise one bit. That's why we're a fat nation, generally speaking.

Those who are true blue Obama supporters will say this is insane (or they won't mind it): we, as a nation right now, could be on a path where the government has a direct part in how healthy we are. That's already started with removing trans fats from foods... so why not expand the Better Foods For All idea?

The President seems to believe in changing this great nation from the U.S.A. to The United Socialist Commune of America -- he wants free healthcare for all... well, sort of free, paid for from taxes, primarily from the taxes of the wealthier people; since they've been more successful and have done well in life, they need to pay for those who don't make a lot of money as well as those who don't want to work in life.

When everyone can have every issue taken care of, the usage of the healthcare system will increase exponentially and the cost of this new healthcare system will skyrocket. The high cost will cause the government to panic when they can't continue to pay for it. What will they do?

To be able to pay for the Utopian Obamanation Free Healthcare System, one thing they'll do is raise taxes and/or everyone's cost of living (an indirect tax.) Another thing they might work toward is dictating some of the ways citizens of this country live their life -- order them to be healthier. I have no clue how they'd go about doing this but when you're paying for something for someone, and when you're rationing it, it makes sense to save yourself some money. In order to reduce healthcare costs, they will need to not just lecture to people that they want them to be healthier, but actively be their nutritional and workout coaches. "You, Joe Citizen, if you want this free healthcare, you must lose 20 pounds by your next visit to the doctor we tell you to go to. If you don't meet our requirements, you will be charged X amount of dollars. Your healthcare should be free but you are in danger of forfeiting that full privilege. So don't eat donuts and/or exercise. We don't care which. Just do it or else."

Yes, working to make America healthier is a good thing. Obama has decided that's what he wants. What's not good is the fact that he and the government will be lecturing to America (lecturing to their children) that Coca Cola and Doritos are bad. What if America doesn't get that much healthier at the mere request of the government? Maybe they'll tax companies knowing that those companies will in turn have to raise their prices making a liter of cola cost $3 and a bag of Doritos also $3, donuts will be 2 bucks a piece and a meal at McDonald's for just one person or a medium popcorn at the movies will cost $10. Some people will quit the habits they have if they can't afford them anymore. Take away unhealthy choices and maybe American citizens, in general, will get healthier thus reducing healthcare costs.

Eating fruits and vegetables and staying away from the fried chicken and cola and other sugars is a good thing. But don't be surprised if they work to chisel away at our choice to easily consume those items if we wish to. That could also be called taking away some of our freedom. I'm all for a less fat and healthier America!!! But I also fully support one's choice to eat what they wish and to get diabetes and to die from a massive heart attack weighing 300 pounds.

If I'm someday required by the government to fill out a survey of what I eat, after they run it through some newly created, bloated budget government Better Health For All Americans office, they'll tell me to cut back on many things. But at least they'll give me a smiley face stamp for running.

The North Face trail running shoe -- good for use in the Appalachian Mountains ... but seriously, they are rather small compared to the Rocky Mountains ... Sierra Nevada are sweet, too.  Would definitely use 'em in the Alps, that's for sure.  One thing's for sure -- Jerry Garcia or Bob Weir or Phil Lesh or Blaise Compaoré probably never went running in Liberia, Burkina Faso, Ouagadougou, Pyongyang, 평양 직할시 조선민주주의인민공화국 平壤直轄市 朝鮮民主主義人民共和國, Türkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Кыргызстан, Киргизия, Uzbekistan, O'zbekiston, Ўзбекистон Республикаси, Tajikistan, Тоҷикистон.  Probably the same with Brent Mydland.  At least that's my gut feeling.  I could be wrong.  I mean, there were a lot of drugs at Grateful Dead shows and the good Lord above, He knows I did my share!
Thursday Morning Run: 27 min 38 sec
+17 min 18 sec
.
3 Days Since My Last Run6:05 a.m.71° ● dawn

After FAILing my last time out, I had to make sure I got back to where I should be at. Twasn't easy. Not enough sleep for running is never a good thing but with the temperature reaching 80 before noon and then 90+ in the afternoon, and then not cooling off until After Midnight, I've got to get out there in the early a.m. when it's coolest. My run would have gone just fine with plenty of sleep but I was pretty tired. I still succeeded but when I was finished I had that feeling of wanting to just lie down right on the trail and sleep until the hot sun woke me up hours later. The last thing I wanted was a fifteen minute walk back to the house. Now that I'm back, showered, and having my coffee, all I want is some sleep.
4 runs in June :: 1:32:33 sec· X
10 runs in MAY:
4 hours - 9 min
8 runs in April:
3 hours 29 min
6 runs in March:
2 hours 28 min
*** FEBRUARY ***
3 hours 41 min
January 2009
2 hours 54 min
December
2 hours 42 min
November:2 hours 31 min
October 2008:2 hours 10 min

6 comments:

btsacto said...

zooma, you crack me up! Thanks!

Anonymous said...

Indeed!!

(...laughing with you or AT you?)

Zoooma!! said...

So is it laughable to ponder potentially plausible problems plaguing people's privacy plus their right to live free from too much government intrusion?

Well, is it? A lot of people don't want the government running their lives. But if we roll over then they're going to do what they want. Senator Teddy (D) wants to fine citizens for not taking part in the healthcare system he envisions. Something like that. Seriously? Fine us? Please, Teddy, please send me and millions like me to Federal prison for not taking part. I dare ya.

But there's a larger issue than whether or not the fine-the-dissenters plan ever comes to be -- the fact that there are Politicians (D) out there who want total control over our lives and they're not going to stop until every Utopian Commie/Socialist wet dream is put into place and we're all subjects of the state who can't take a dump on odd hours of the day because it's bad for the environment. These people can and will come up with all sorts of ideas. Are the ones I came up with insane? No. What's insane is to walk around every day thinking things like that could never happen. Of course they could. What's also insane is to think things like that happening is okay. It's not okay. The government needs to back off... not take over.

Anonymous said...

Zooma,

Visit prisonplanet.com (with an open mind).

(The "the fact that there are Politicians (D)" and "until every Utopian Commie/Socialist wet dream", etc. is "laughable". Like, "Politicians (R)" are not the same shit. They're ALL just "employees".)

Zoooma!! said...

I'll make a deal with ya. I'll visit your recommended website if you start to use a Google name regularly if you comment here. You can keep your email address anonymous and by using the Google sign-in, it'll help let you know if I've responded to a comment of yours (or if anyone else has.) (I just don't want to carry on conversation or debate with Anonymous and I'd be more likely to if you were an actual person instead of another soulless automatonamaton.) Or just keep using Anonymous but sign your comments with a name like some other regular commenters do. Deal?

And listen, the (R) Politicians are dillweeds also, for the most part, no argument there... but here's the key difference I'm seeing from plenty of the (D) Dillweed Politicians -- the (R)'s don't want total control of our lives. In general, the (R)'s want us to be responsible for ourselves while the (D)'s want to tell us how many calories we can buy on government controlled handouts, etc. IF they get a hold of healthcare then people will die because they won't go to every length possible to try to save lives sometimes. Why not? Cost. "Sorry, we've done all we can for you. Anything else we just can't afford/we're not going to foot the bill for...."

Under the system we have now, a doctor will do all he or she can when told to. Even when not told to sometimes. But if the government's in charge....... yeah, that'll go well. Anyone trusting the government to do a good AND efficient job is either insane or blind moron.

Anonymous said...

I am not "another soulless automatonamaton".

It seems we both believe (know!) that things ARE fucked-up. We do not agree with the cause (or that inherent trait - the need to place blame on whom).

You're very concerned with "total control of our lives" - rightfully so, but you ignore the previous administration's shredding of The Constitution. (...under the guise of a "War On Terror" - BULLSHIT they started...that "POWER grab" thing you previously mentioned.)

You espouse "Conservative values". This is where I get confused - it seems to come down to you don't want tax increases. Geeezzz, who does? Separation of church and state? Abortion is NOT a political issue - it's the WOMAN'S choice. (Period. And, if she decides to let the "father" have any input, that's up to her.) Nothing could be more personal (READ: "NOT political.") The same with an individual's sexual orientation. But, what am I telling you - you already know this. It's just that you come across as SO republicker...and they are the party against this (of course, when some "R" politician gets caught with some underage boy's cock in his mouth usually in a public washroom, or some such, it looks more than a little hypocritical).

These things (and a few others I've probably missed) apart, I sense we probably also agree on many political and social issues (See anything at prisonplanet.com that piqued your curiosity/tickled your fancy?)...and appreciate good music.

I don't disrespect you, Zooma. And, I think making Grateful Dead (and other) music accessible is a great thing. Thank you.

Lefty

one says one number and the other another
but they were set at the same time. Hmmm...

 
Calvin and Hobbes in the snow -- animated