A Common Sense Approach To Obesity

Let’s face it. America has an obesity problem and we know it. Many of the rising healthcare costs can be attributed to the fact that, over all, the nation is obese. Every where you look, there is always some new exercise equipment, weight loss program or diet. Liposuction is the number one cosmetic surgery procedure done in America, with tummy tucks being number four! Though liposuction and tummy tucks do a lot for self -esteem and appearance, it does very little to benefit you from a health standpoint. This is especially true if you have not altered the behavior that caused you to consider such procedures. Do we need to take such drastic measures to combat obesity? The answer, of course, is “no”.

Discipline and restraint are the operative words of the day. What is needed is a change in attitude and conditioning. This is not a “one size fits all” solution but it is a “one size fits most” solution. Suffice it to say, there are those among us whose mass has more to do with physiological make up and medical issues such as thyroid problems. However, for most of us, this is not the case.

One of the things that we do not realize is that eating too much is the same as drinking too much alcohol. Certain alcohol, such as red wine, in moderation actually has a health benefit. Nevertheless, these same beverages can wreak havoc on the body when taken in excess over a sustained period of time. This is also the case with over indulging in the consumption of food.
Most of us need not go on some crash diet. We need only make minor lifestyle adjustments. These changes should include:

1. Drink water. Dehydration intensifies hunger. The body’s chemical make up is around 75% water. As a result, maintaining an appropriate level of hydration is very beneficial to both your health and diet.

2. Consume smaller portions. It is better to eat six small meals than 3 large ones. This is due to the fact that these smaller meals will condition the digestive system to work on a more frequent basis which, in turn, will increase your metabolism.

3. When you BEGIN to feel full, STOP EATING! Yes, we have heard all of our lives that we should clean our plates. However, if our eyes overestimated our appetite, “cleaning your plate” is not the best option. Cleaning your plate would be comparable to getting a buzz while drinking and continuing to drink. In short, eat and drink responsibly. Either save the rest for later or throw it away.

4. Be cognizant of snack choices. Fruits and snacks that are high in fiber and protein are preferable to snacks that are high in sugar and fat.

5. Exercise. Strenuous exercise speeds up the metabolism for about 36- 48 hours. You do not need a membership at a gym to get a good work out. Walking, jogging, jump rope, burpees, air squats, pushups, pull-ups/chin-ups, crunches and dips can all be done without the aid of fancy gym equipment. In addition, these exercises hit every major muscle group and provide cardio options as well. You just need to provide the discipline and will power.

6. Have a cheat day. Since you have worked diligently to be discipline and restrained in the pursuit of better health, reward yourself. Set aside one day, and only ONE day, out of the week to binge. Eat however much of whatever it is you crave.


As you can see, these are very simple steps to altering your life and health for the better. As always with exercise, you may want to consult a physician before you start. However, with this common sense approach, over time you will notice a change in how you look and feel.Follow @WyncThinks

Obama Will Win In 2012

Why are so many Republicans hesitant to jump into the Presidential race?  The answer is simple. They know that President Barack Obama will get re-elect. This election’s Republican nominee will be a “sacrificial lamb” for 2012.  The real favorites and heavy hitters will not come out until 2016. Then is when we will see the likes of Governors Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal and, possibly, Jeb Bush.  By that time, hopefully the economy will be doing better, the momentum of the Tea Party will have slowed and they will not have to contend with going head to head with an incumbent.

Now, understand that this is not because President Obama is viewed so favorably.  He should be very vulnerable but he isn’t and won’t be, because he has governed more like a moderate Republican than a moderate or liberal Democrat.  To be to the right of Obama, at this point, is a blatant catering to a far right wing agenda which the independent voter will not go for. He will not get any challenges from the left even though he has not shown himself to be a progressive or liberal. This, to a certain extent, handicaps the general election in his favor. 

In addition, the Republican candidate will have to navigate through a treacherous strait.  He or she will be caught between negotiating the proverbial “rock”, which is the Tea Party faction, in the primaries and then, afterwards, be able to appeal to the figurative “hard place”, which is the independent voter, in the general election. 

None of the potential candidates have presented realistic plans on getting the economy back on track.  We have yet to hear a viable and factually believable plan for job creation.  That is the real reason why we are hearing so much about the deficit, which both parties are equally responsible for creating and exacerbating.  It is because there is no plan to put people back to work.

 

However, high soaring rhetoric abounds on how they seek to reduce the size of government.  Do they not realize that when we trim the size of government, we cut jobs?  These jobs do not magically and instantaneously become private sector jobs.  So, in effect, it is being advertised that the unemployment rate will spike after all of the so called “deep and painful” cuts to government spending.

 

What will they have to talk about . . . lowering taxes?  Despite the spin on cable news, federal taxes over the course of the last three years, relative to the GDP, have been at historic lows!  However, tax receipts has also taken a sharp dip; down roughly 13% this year compared to 2008 receipts.

   

Will they talk about expanding oil exploration? President Obama has already worked to take the wind out of those sails. So therefore, it is back to the old faithful hot button issues. Look for such topics as family values, abortion, immigration, gay rights and, possibly, gun control to be at the forefront of the debate to stoke emotions and shore up the evangelical voting bloc.

                In 2012, the excitement will be in the House and Senate races. There will not be a whole lot of excitement in the Presidential race.   The House and Senate races will be exciting because it will be up to the Democrats to show and distinguish themselves not as Republican light but Democrats. They will need to show their base that they have a plan and a spine; and are not a party of capitulators and surrenderists.  The Republicans, on the other hand, will be looking to solidify the notion that they have lived up to the proclaimed “mandate” that brought them to power in the House.  To the extent of how these two narratives play out will be the crux of the excitement in the 2012 elections.

Social Conservatism Is Akin To Sharia Law

                Social conservatism is a threat to freedom and liberty. You can not politically espouse social conservatism and claim to be either a strict constitutionalist or a defender of individual rights and freedoms.  To levy such a claim is both illogical and incongruous. Time and time again we have heard Social Conservatives claim that there is no daylight between social conservatism and fiscal conservatism. Those who state this are either regrettably ignorant or are blatantly pushing a patently false narrative based on a faulty premise for political control of the populace.

                It is not by mistake that the founding fathers constructed a Declaration of Independence that was devoid of specified religiosity or pointed theological doctrine. As a matter of fact, Thomas Jefferson wanted this declaration to read, “All men are created equal and independent.  From that equal creation they derive rights inherent and inalienable”.  However, this was modified by Congress to read, “All men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.”  This change was made, of course, to appease both the ministers and slave owners but still held to the principle that America should not be founded on any religion.

The Constitution was intentionally left without reference to any Deity whatsoever; to further establish that this country was in no way a theocracy based on Christianity or any other religion. The only mention of religion was the establishment clause that forbade establishing a state religion. This is because the founders had seen the corruption and damage that state based religion had wrought in Europe, especially England. This point was later reiterated and solidified by article 11 in the US Treaty of Tripoli of 1796-97, by a unanimous approval of the 5^th Congress and then by the signature of President John Adams.

                Our founders were more “Deists” than Christian, meaning that they believed in God but not the religious dogma that those who claimed authority dispensed.  It is historically documented that George Washington never took sacrament, not even on his death bed.  In 1782, Thomas Jefferson stated, “Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To  support roguery and error all over the earth.”

                James Madison once said, “Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.”

                John Adams stated, “. . . Thirteen governments thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.”

                Ben Franklin declared, “When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself  so that its professors are obliged to call for the help of the civil power, ‘tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one.”

                Well, Mr. Franklin, such is the case today. We are constantly bombarded by political attacks on the freedoms of individuals based on religiosity. Social conservatives, whose motives are anchored in “so-called” Christianity, do not seek to convince through example and witness but through laws and coercion.  Then, in the same breath, will condemn those Muslim clerics and mullahs that make and enforce Sharia law in countries that have established themselves as a theocratic or “Islamic” state rooted in religious law.

                There is a certain irony in the fact that 13 states have either proposed or passed laws that would forbid the practice or recognition of Sharia law. These states are considered conservative with seven of the 13 ranked among the top ten most conservative states. These states are considered some of the most socially conservative as well.  As such, opposition to gay marriage and abortion is high.  Yet you have social conservatives laying claim that they are constitutionalist and are trying to take America back to its non-existent Christian roots.

                Do they not realize that when they go to abridge the rights of other individuals based not on crimes against anyone else but on religious edicts, it is no different than a Muslim Cleric issuing a fatwa or declaring a jihad?  This is not what the founders wanted for this country.  To assert anything to the contrary would be an indefensible lie that would further prove one’s proclamation of Christianity undeniably impeachable. 

The record of Jesus, which has been the Bible, has never advocated changing the laws of the land. He only sought to change the hearts and minds of the individuals. If God has given us freewill so that we as individuals can make choices, to suppress our choices would be to usurp the will and intent of God. Furthermore, it would go to undermine the very freedoms in which the founding fathers wished to establish and affirm.