More on Imus and Duke

A few commentators have made an understandable observation about the Imus flap. Namely, that the term “ho” is used in rap music, so what’s the big deal?
Well, a few thoughts:
1) Yes, it’s dreadful, and inexcusable. You’ve heard me complain about it in this blog. But it wasn’t just the word “ho.” It was the term “nappy-headed ho.” Or, in other words, “black ho.” It is the combination of these terms that caused the real problem.
2) The term “ho” is short for “whore.” Obviously vile when applied to women in general. Not much better as a specific insult applied to a woman considered too….hmmm, shall we say “free with her favors”? But at least then it is communicating a value judgement. Woman rotating her butt in a music video? My mother used to say such women were acting like whores, so it is reasonable that the shortened term would convey the same opinion. We can debate whether that is an appropriate communication, but at least I understand what is intended. But what exactly was it about the behavior of these collegiate athletes that was whorish? Can you tell me that? I think that it can only be surmised that the term “ho” meant “black woman” in this context. That was their only sin…the color of their skin. And being mocked for being “nappy-headed” has been a part of racist American culture for hundreds of years.
3) As abominable as I find the lyrics of much rap music, it’s “in the family” so to speak. In other words, if I slap my kid, eyebrows will raise. If YOU slap my kid, that’s assault, and you’re going to jail. If I make love to my wife, that’s, well, that’s a typical morning in the Barnes house. Ahem. But if YOU do it, that’s either rape or grounds for divorce. Context and permission mean EVERYTHING. Yes, actions and words mean completely different things, depending on who, what, where, and why.
4) No, I don’t automatically think Imus is a racist. But you know something? Probably 5-10% of people—black, white, Asian, whatever—ARE racists. Where do you think they live? What do you think they do for a living? They rarely show themselves except when protected by anonymity. Don’t you think some of them are radio personalities? And even if he isn’t, don’t you think such comments give aid and comfort to that 5-10%?
5) What we have here, really, is a line in the sand. For 400 years, blacks have had to put up with being called whatever whites wanted to call them, excluded from whatever whites wanted to exclude them from, and were told to be good, quiet little citizens about it. Play the game. Go to school. We did. And a lot of us got law degrees and MBAs, and are now working in Corporate America. Imus wants to make his 500K a year doing insult radio? That’s his right. And it is our right to deny his sponsors our dollars. Or to express our pain and outrage in whatever legal way available. No, government shouldn’t censor such talk. But we as consumers certainly can.
6) I love the fact that some commentators say that “Imus will lose some black listeners…” Oh? Only black people care if black people are insulted? Only women care if women are insulted? Only gays care if gays are insulted? Isn’t that an interesting revelation of attitude: “If you aren’t a member of group X, you won’t/shouldn’t care what happens to group X.” This type of thinking leads to Holocausts. My experience says that PLENTY of white people care about blacks. Plenty of men care about women. Plenty of straights care about gays. Plenty of human beings, in other words, care about the dignity of other human beings, regardless of superficial differences. And I'm betting that anyone reading this blog would agree.

We're all in this together, folks. There's nobody out there. Whatever you see in the world is a reflection of you, your own inner demons and angels. What you say about the world tells me infinitely more about YOU than it ever does the world "outside."

Reality is a Rorschach test.
##
I have a suspicion about what happened at Duke University. I think the frat boys got too rowdy, said some insulting things to the stripper they'd hired. I wouldn't be surprised if the comments were racially charged: alcohol lowers inhibitions. Perhaps too much touching as well: there's a good reason strippers work in pairs, or with bodyguards. And the girl tried to get revenge. Just a guess. If that's what happened, I sympathize, but she deserves to be prosecuted. I guarantee you that their lives have been damaged. If they did not rape her, this whole thing is inexcusable, and I feel nothing but the deepest sorrow for them and their families.

And the girl needs help. And jail time.

##

Today is a fasting day. I’m going to yoga shortly, and will then re-hydrate but not eat all day. Tananarive says that my upper body muscle mass is increasing…and has in the three WEEKS I’ve been on this program. And she knows that I work like a dog, and get damned little result from it. My body is almost invulnerable to illness, but gaining muscle mass is very, very, hard for me.

My daughter Nicki might be in a stage play in a couple of months that would demand she show a little skin. She’d like to lose about 15 pounds by then, and is watching me like a hawk to see how I do on I.F.
If she choses this way for weight loss, I will kick her sweet little butt if she doesn’t go WAY out of her way to eat fresh fruits and vegetables by the cartload on non-fasting days. And I’d probably suggest a little fruit on fasting days as well, to help quell hunger pangs, and even out her blood sugar.
#
Our favorite weight-loss exercise in this house is called a “Fat Ripper” or what Dragondoor.com refers to as a “DOE Man-Maker” since it was created by a security specialist at the Department of Energy. The idea is 30-60 seconds of intense kettlebell exercise, followed by 60-120 seconds of moderate jogging. SPIKE the heartrate, then recover, get it? We use a treadmill set on the “30 minute medium” level. And then choose three KB exercises. This last time it was Swings, Windmills, and an evil concoction called a Deck Squat. Each exercise is done for 40-60 seconds (in rotation) followed by a minute on the treadmill. Doing this with a partner, switching stations as it were, is fun because everyone tries to figure out whether going first or second allows you to miss the hardest running periods. What’s worse: running fast, or running hills? Depends on what KB stuff you’ve been doing. (By the way, this adaptation of the Fat Ripper is actually more intense than recommended. It works perfectly fine to make the recovery jogging as gentle as you wish. The jogging is not to increase fitness: it is active recovery, a chance to re-distribute your lactic acid.)

We also make a game out of burning music Cds. Good music makes a workout infinitely more entertaining. We like Hard-driving rock, rap, R&B…something with a kick-ass beat, and somewhat aggressive lyrics. The theme from “Casino Royale,” “You Know My Name,” by Chris Cornell, really gets my juices running. And corny as it may be, either “The Rocky Theme” or “Eye of the Tiger” is just killer. Makes me want to go out and fight Clubber Lang.

Not.

The Don Imus Flap

Interesting. Another example of the Michael Richards flap, really, where a comedian “goes too far.” In this case, by using the phrase “Nappy-headed ho’s” in connection with the Rutgers Women’s basketball team. Bad taste, certainly, but that’s Imus. Comedians often walk this edge. Now, one could make the case that black folks are simply being too sensitive, and there’s a part of me that agrees with that. But only part.
If a black DJ had made the exact same comment, I would have thought it tasteless, but the “nappy headed” wouldn’t have bothered me, although the “ho’s” would have.
Here’s my comment: it is normal for those with power to go unconscious about the fact that they have it, wield it, profit by it, and fight to keep it. I’m sure that for many, there is a sense of “oh, come on. Why can’t we just get over it and have fun…”
The reason is that in any underdog/overdog situation, the overdog ALWAYS wants to know why the targets of their “humor” can’t just “get over it.” You know? I don’t particularly think Imus is a racist—no more than human beings in general. Real racists are more careful about their speech in public. But you’d better bet that comments like that give aid and comfort to racists. Is that Imus’ responsibility? Not really. But on the other hand…
On a genuinely level playing field, all is fair. But when one group owns 100% of the radio and television networks, as well as all the media conglomerates, the talk of a “level playing field” is absurd. When I see black men having sex in movies, I’ll believe that there is something remotely approaching cultural parity.
Does any of this make Imus wrong? No…that’s a personal judgment, and not open to some kind of absolute evaluation. But what I enjoy about this flap is the fact that blacks, outnumbered ten to one, have organized sufficiently to affect advertisers and scare radio executives. Please remember that when I was a kid, these EXACT same market forces kept black dramas off the air, killed black variety shows, kept blacks in subservient positions—and in general, whites “never noticed” any of this stuff. And anything could be said about us, as any time, and “no one noticed.” And you could make movies like “Gone With the Wind” where blacks are happy slaves, thinking back with wistful memories of the days white folks took care of us…and that film goes on to become the most popular movie in American history.
Until you’ve walked in those shoes, you can’t really imagine what it feels like to hear a Don Imus say what he said. And while I think blacks over-reacted, it’s an over-reaction that is completely understandable, and one that is no worse than whites would have done, if the situation were reversed.
##
EATING ON THE I.F. PROGRAM
I supplement with multivitamins, the “Ultimate Meal” powder, and a few other things I play with (like Spiru-tein powder). But most of my nutrition I get from eating a general pattern of:
3 parts fresh fruits and vegetables
2 parts lean proteins
1 part complex carbs
This “inverted pyramid is flexible, which helps keep me from being too obsessive. The Warrior diet plan uses a similar scheme, where you start a meal with vegetables, go from there to proteins, then carbs. Drink a big glass of water, wait fifteen minutes, and if you’re still hungry, start over again. This is after fasting all day. However, if you eat ROUGHLY this way on your non-fast I.F. days, I think you are getting the point.
There is a point of maximum efficiency, after which a practice gives diminishing returns. I think with I.F. that point is about 36 hours. I’m experimenting with not eating between (for instance) 10pm Sunday and 8am Tuesday, giving my body a complete day and night of emptiness. The idea is that there are some growth and healing factors secreted at night (for instance GH) and that to the degree that I.F. works by convincing your body you’d better be one bad mamma-jamma of a hunter or your family will starve, it would make sense that sleeping on an empty stomach would have a powerful effect.
I like to break my fast with juice or fruit. If you want to lose weight, just concentrate on fresh fruit and vegetables, and proteins on your eating day. Add carbs back in as appropriate. Please be CERTAIN to eat plenty of FRESH food on eating day, and take a damned good vitamin. A fruit and protein smoothie would probably be dynamite.
##
I have to admit to being uncertain why people have such strong negative reactions to Hillary Clinton. Those of you with insight, please post. Right now, it feels to me that she’s just been attacked so consistently by forces on the Right that the negative myth looms larger than any reality: people were just terrified of Bill, really hated him in a way I’ve rarely seen. If you have objective reasons she shouldn’t be a presidential candidate, please offer them.
Me, I’m slightly inclined toward Obama because he opposed the war. It’s certainly possible that if he’d been in the Senate at the time he would have gone along with it. Or not. I can only go on the behaviors I see. And in this regard, I’d like to vote for someone I consider at least as intelligent and intuitive as I am. Until he falls on his face, Barack is looking pretty good.
##
I have an overview, a general sense of what the technology I first talked about in my book “Firedance” might be. Now this is general self-healing and personal progress, divided into two sections: maturation, and enlightenment.
1) Maturation can be measured in the degree of responsibility taken in the three major arenas of life: fitness/health, spirit/relationships, career/education. If you have all three in balance, CONGRATULATIONS! You are almost certainly an adult. If not…it is valid to question.
2) Enlightenment can be (in my opinion) considered the opening of that door of perception normally only opened at the moment of death, prior to that happy occasion. As the Sufis say, “Die Before You Die.” What would this mean? Dissolving the ego, eradication of all short-term selfish intents, dropping perceptual filters. Persistent non-dualistic thinking. IF this is true, it makes sense out of all world religions: they begin as genuine spiritual breakthrough, but are then interpreted by well-meaning but unenlightened people. They create rafts of rules, and those conducive to the creation and sustenance of an organization survive and are passed from generation to generation. But enlightenment is a solitary, individual thing—until the illusion of individuality is destroyed. NO organization is going to help you do this. NO religion governed by non-enlightened people can help you to enlightenment. Charles Johnson sent me a news article about Buddhist Monks leaving the monastery to get computer science degrees, with the idea of “bringing the monastery into the 21st century.”

However admirable that may be in helping people become “better” people, that has nothing to do directly with the intent of the Buddha, which was liberation from addiction to the belief in an external world, freeing us from automatic behavior patterns, and clarity of intent. As Jed McKenna said (in his wise-ass way) “they get you in the door with enlightenment, and then steer you to the compassion aisle.”
So what would Firedance have to say about this? I’d use a two-step process:
1) various techniques designed to bring subconscious crap to conscious level: journaling, dream-diaries, meditation, psychodrama, therapy, poetry, etc. Bring those emotions up, and anchor them into the body. Make your goals balanced between body, mind and spirit to find your emotional pus-pockets

This is followed by
2) Various applications of the “Fear Removal” technique, designed to clear negative emotion through physical motion. Yoga, tai chi, FlowFit, various aerobic exercises, weight lifting…anything done with conscious intent on breathing, and with the emotions “front loaded” and then taken through the Neuro Immuno Endocrine response (2nd wind) would do it. Better still if you are moving the body through Six Degrees of Freedom, to break the conditioned tension chains.

Of course, the more thorough each of these steps is, the better. If you do this—alternating between stirring the subconscious and aligning the body with your personal and erotic self-image…

Well, the idea is that what the Sufis refer to as “nafs” are kinks in the psychic wiring. Remove these fears and inhibitions, and the “energy” naturally and automatically evolves to the next level of Maslow’s hierarchy. Handle this stuff in the arenas of survival, sex, power, and emotion…and you have rooted your being in the solid realities of existence. Then, it will grow automatically into the higher chakras. Once you have mastered the basics of life, it is possible to move beyond automatic fears, and be ready to let go of the tools you used to gain clarity.
##
A real example: I have a friend who considers himself tremendously spiritual. Fantasically evolved, and a leader of others on the journey. This person cheated on his wife, betrayed his best friend, and sits on an absolute fountain of pain and fear…but boy, is he ever spiritual. He also drinks too much, and is quite overweight. The lack of connection with the basic realities of his being makes it possible for him to hallucinate about his personal growth. His lack of understanding of his own motivations makes it easy for him to blame others for his actions, and to feel little compassion for the pain of others. It is sad…and would have been preventable had there been any objective measurement of his progress.
##
I’m not offering an easy path. I’m merely pointing out that a path of personal growth rooted in the battle for physical health, emotional connection and service to community really can’t go too wrong. All the rest of this is just idle speculation…

Back from the Northwest

Just back from Seattle and Norwescon. Love that convention, and the people there—my first time in four years. Got lots of comments on how lean I looked, including one from a friend who mentioned that his lesbian business partner was checking me out…hah!
##
Had dinner with writer Charles Johnson, a dear friend, brilliant mind and devout Buddhist. Ran the ideas about “Spiritual Autolysis” past him, and we enjoyed the evening, spoke of politics, art, race, life, raising kids, and a million other things. It reminds me of the time that he, I, Tananarive, playwright August Wilson sat in that same restaurant from seven until two in the morning, talking. God, that was great. I miss August…
##
It was just a little hard to keep on Intermittent Fasting while on the road. When I break my fast, I like to do it Warrior Diet style (fruit and vegetables first, then proteins, and then carbs) but I found that it was tricky. I cheated a bit, had a glass of orange juice here, and an apple there. Seems to have worked. Some answers to questions…
1) I’ve noticed no real difference in energy on fast and non-fast days regarding workouts. Note that I don’t do strictly weight-training workouts though, so I can’t comment on the specific anaerobic pathway workouts that some of you guys do with intensity. Please report back.
2) There are going to be family occasions and special times when eating is important for emotional connection. You know what? I say enjoy yourself, unless you notice it’s happening frequently, and is an indicator that your subconscious is screwing you over. Our ancestors certainly got lucky two days in a row some times! In fact, probably an even more powerful protocol—which I would NOT suggest, is to flip a coin thirty times at the beginning of the month. Heads you eat, tails you don’t…
3) I would say that on non-fasting days, eat PLENTY of fresh fruits and vegetables, take your vitamins, be careful. After all, Roy Walford, who pioneered Caloric Restriction, died at about 80 of Lou Gehrig’s disease. I don’t know, but it’s possible that that might have something to do with a lack of this or that nutrient. But then, he was trying to reduce calories by 50%, and then compensate with enriched nutrients. The problem is that you can only add back the nutrients you know about. It is egotistical to think we know everything God put into food, you know? So what I’m advising is to eat hearty on non-fasting days, cut calories only by cutting crap, and be VERY CONSCIOUS of how you are feeling on a day to day basis. Joints hurting? Low-level aches and pains? Energy spikes? Be careful here, people. I love you guys, and am sharing this out of a sense that you are grown-ass men and women who deserve to know about something which might save your lives down the road---or at least be a time saver and energy increaser. While I wouldn’t suggest it for specific weight loss, weight loss is almost inevitable. Don’t push it, o.k?
4) I had a conversation with a friend on racial and gender issues. The question came up of whether Hillary or Barack had the best electability. It was her contention that white men would rather vote for a black man than a white woman. I kind of agreed, based on the idea that, in war, I think the average soldier would rather charge up a hill behind a black sergeant than a female one. But the question presents itself: which causes more social and life problems, race, or gender? I don’t know (although I have opinions) but I have a suggestion for anyone who wants to know. By the way, I haven’t performed this experiment, so this isn’t a trick. Here we go: choose an arbitrary number large enough to provide some kind of statistical reality, say a minimum of 10 or 20. The next 10 or 20 black women you have any kind of real interaction with, ask THEM which has been more of a hinderance in life: race or gender. Which has caused more discomfort, and in which have they experienced more prejudice? Please report back with your results!
5) Got my portable yoga floor today! It’s a hinged wood panel that sits atop a rug to provide better support for wrists and ankles. Can’t wait to use it.
6) Oh…and before I close, I had a chance to work out at Coach Sonnon’s Rmax gym at the Bellingham Athletic Club. Wow! It’s a beautiful little space crammed with clubbells and kettlebells (yes, kettlebells! Scott has hooked up with world champion kettlebell master Valeri Federenko, and the results can only be spectacular.) Scott led us through his brilliant 4x7 protocol: 5 pushups, 10 1-legged squats, 15 pullups. Each modified for level of fitness (from pushup to Hindus on parallel bars to plank extensions, for instance). See how many cycles you can do in 20 minutes. I did 7.5 cycles, and was well trashed. Felt sore, tight, and oddly loose (!?) for days afterward. Then I attended his Rmax Sambo (Russian Judo) class, and ate humble pie. My my, it’s been a looooong time since I’ve done mat work, and it was all I could do to keep from being twisted into a knot! Scott is simply a phenomenal teacher, and I cannot recommend him and his methodology higher. He is the absolute best, and his approach dovetails to any other martial art you practice. Do yourself a favor—if you live anywhere near Bellingham Washington, experience Scott Sonnon.
7) One more thing: if you cheat too much on the IF plan, you could yo-yo your weight. Your body is definitely producing more lean muscle...it WANTS to get heavier. If you give it too many calories by eating on fasting day, you can gain weight easily. But I'm looking great in the mirror...

Good IF questions

"That means that there is a tremendous amount of anecdotal as well as experimental and theoretical and historical information"__Any good links or journal articles to share that haven't been posted already about IF?”

All the links I have, I found by typing “IF” into a search engine.
##

“Saves at least 1 hour of sleep a day."__This I'm unclear on. How does IF save 1 houre of sleep a day? What am I missing?”

Some research hints that fasting sleep is deeper and more efficient. People were sleeping less.
##
“Two questions: __If the key factor in IF and CR is hunger itself, as at least some of the research would seem to suggest, mightn't taking a supplement such as hoodia to squelch the hunger be counterproductive?”

My guess is “non-optimal” rather than counterproductive. And I anticipate using it during a “break-in” period, actually. Even without the extreme hunger (and Hoodia takes the edge off nicely), you are emptying the gut and training the body to work off fats rather than sugars. It definitely “helps” the discipline along, but I’ve been shocked at how automatic many eating behaviors are. And unless you positively CRAM your stomach on eating day, you’re taking in somewhat less food overall. Hunger is definitely sharper, and my tolerance for unhealthy food is just vanishing.
So my guess is that Hoodia might cut the positive benefits by maybe 25-30%. But time will tell…I don’t plan on using it forever.

Breaking my fast

Just came back from Yoga class. I am more convinced all the time that a Yoga or Chi Gung class is one of the healthiest things you can do for yourself. Unless you are competent enough to TEACH a yoga class, you should have a teacher correcting you…
##
Just broke my fast with an apple. In a few minutes, I'm wolfing down a Falafel. It is 11:21 am, and I haven’t eaten since 10pm on Sunday night. Was hungry a couple of times yesterday, but squelched it with Hoodia. I have a suspicion that sleeping on an empty stomach is a valuable way to increase the efficiency of IF.
##
Question for you guys: what is the average amount of time you spend eating and preparing food every day? Now, if you have a family you might still have to spend time in the kitchen even on fasting days (not to mention the fact that eating is great bonding time) but I’m kinda interested in seeing how much time the average person would save on such an eating plan.
One of the reasons is the entire “Golden Hour” idea. People have complained that they can’t, just can’t get an hour a day. Well…this might be a way, right?
Please remember: I’ve only been looking into this for two weeks. I am VERY aware that I tend to get enthusiastic, and don’t want to overdo it, especially considering my lack of experience with IF protocols. But it’s also fun to share ideas, no?
Could the ability to control basic drives be a precursor to adulthood? Sex, urination, hunger, emotional outburst…aren’t these some of the most important controls that must be effected to make a healthy adult? I’d love some thoughts about this.
##
I suspect that I’m not reacting to the hunger in a typical way, and I hesitate to speculate about that. Let’s just say that I’d bet people who are aerobically fit are better at drawing energy from fat than average. On the other hand, I know some REALLY fit and apparently healthy people who energy-crash in a heartbeat if they don’t get their three squares. These people have very, very low body fat. Hmmm. So there is a range of health and fitness that would optimize this stuff, obviously. One of the interesting things about IF is that you can find research and discussion in medical journals, biological journals, life extension sites, spiritual sites, and hard-core athletic sites: the last for its stimulation of muscle growth factors and recovery.
That means that there is a tremendous amount of anecdotal as well as experimental and theoretical and historical information (research on fasting during Ramadan is fascinating. Note the reduction in sleep time!) are producing reams of data at mach speed. Good.
But the best thing I can say is that the blood chemistry changes seem to be the same—or better—than with Caloric Reduction, on which the science is close to impeccable. It isn’t unreasonable to project a similar result.
What would happen if everything turned out to be true? For Christ’s sakes, you’d have a single activity that:
1) Had beneficial results to an unreal spectrum of diseases and disorders. (Go check for yourself. If this was a pill, you could charge any price at all for it)
2) Enhanced all major fitness components.
3) Enhanced energy.
4) Prolonged life by 30-40% of whatever average lifespan remains at time protocol begins.
5) Saves 20-40 hours per month.
6) Saves at least 1 hour of sleep a day.
7) Enhances sex drive.

Let’s see…if I add up the time-relevant factors (less sleep needed, more time saved, prolonging life) wouldn’t it be reasonable to say that it increases useful lifespan by 50%? Just thinking aloud here. Damn, this stuff weirds me out…

Fasting again

Back fasting today. Tea this morning, with some Amrit Kalash and Hoodia. This is a workout day, and it'll be interesting to see how my energy levels are. Actually, I wouldn' t expect a problem...but after a vigorous workout, how will it feel not to eat? Will I feel my muscles cannibalizing my own body? Hopefully selecting for fat, but we'll see...
##
A suspicion about the IF program: if you are deliberately pushing buttons to convince your body there is a famine or food shortage, if would be useful to go to bed on an empty stomach. That means that 6-6 programs wouldn't be as efficient, unfortunately. In fact, if you stopeating at, say, 9pm on Monday,and don't eat again until 8 am on Wednesday, that's almost a 36 hour fast, isn't it? It makes sense that that would work best, but sounds rather ghastly. Just for fun, I think I'll try it.
##
Now I'm starting to get back to my "normal" schedule. Bunches of different projects, but most importantly the script Tananarive and I have been working on, and the sequel to Great Sky Woman.
##
Bad day last Friday. I tried to get out of L.A. to Philadelphia for an Octavia Butler event, and weather systems in Dallas conspired with the beginning of Spring Break to completely thwart me. Ugh. I've never missed an event in my life! This just sucked. Ah well, it gave me more time with my family, and at bit more rest time. Still, I missed seeing my oldest buddy, Gordon Lewis, who lives back there. And maybe a chance to run up those steps "Rocky" style...
##
Back in the "est" days, the transformative workshop wouldn't let you go to the bathroom except on specific breaks. I understand why: the emotional stuff in the room got very very heavy at times, and people would ditch out just to get a breather. There were plenty of breaks, but thirty years later, all people remember about est is that "they wouldn't let me go to the bathroom." Fascinating, really. Mushtaq's take on it is that there is basic control circuitry built into the human organism. One is the "bathroom" circuit. A passage from infancy to toddler is control of this circuit. Now, in an adult, if you control when they can pee, it punches this button, and people are placed back in a younger mind set, ripe for imprinting. Maybe so. But this perspective lends itself to the question of fasting. My suspicion? Fasts are part of the maturation process. Babies want to eat whenever they are hungry. Adults must learn to postpone gratification. Therefore, the ability to specifically postpone an urge as powerful as hunger is a maturation doorway. Therefore, potentially another very very interesting benifit of IF: maturation, to the degree that learning to control basic biological urges is a maturing experience...and I believe it is considered to be in all cultures around the world.
##
At this point, it's looking ridiculous. The scientifically established (or seriously theorized) benifits of IF include, but are not limited to:
1) Resistence to diseases: Cancer, Blood pressure, Diabetes, colds and flu
2) Healing Factors: Bone Density, general wound healing, GH release
3) Fitness: Reduced obesity, muscle building, "getting ripped", endurance.
4) Mental: Focus, energy, drive. Resistence to Alzheimers. Production of "BDNF" (Brain-derived Neurotrophic Factor), as its name implies, is a substance that increases the growth of new nerve cells in the brain. Which has, among other things, a powerful Anti-depressant effect!
5) Life Extension: 30-40% increase in remaining lifespan. Caloric restriction is the ONLY technique known to extend MAXIMUM life span. In other words, mice on CR were observed to live longer than any other comparable mice, anywhere.
6) Time management: 20-40 extra hours per month.
7) General goodies: increased sex drive

This is completely nuts. PLEASE, if anyone can find data counterindicating the above, or indicating that the process is unhealthy in any way, PLEASE let me know. If a "magic bullet" has ever come down the pike, for God's sake this is is. Even better? Mature, focused people can use it more easily...thereby giving an "edge" to the very type of people we need more of in this world. Need more data, please!

Steve

"I Think I Love My Wife" (2007)

I Think I Love My Wife (2007)

The story of a man (Chris Roick) trapped in a sexless marriage (with Gina Torres) tempted by an old friend (Kerry Washington) and forced through a series of comic misadventures that bring him to the brink of infidelity…but will he cross that line? Good question. Loosely based on a French film “Chloe In the Afternoon”, this is an improvement for Rock in terms of acting and directing, but not a completely satisfying piece of work despite some nice acting and writing. I’d give it a “C+”
And now if you want to know what I really think…
##
WARNING! SAMBO ALERT! SPOILER ALERT!
##
I came within a hair of utterly loathing this film. Remember, please, that I cannot go to an experience without bringing some preconceptions and preassumptions to it. In this case, my assumption was that Chris Rock, as writer/director, would have to avoid open sexuality in his film due to factors we’ve discussed in nauseating detail on this blog. Therefore, my antennae were up. SPOILERS AHEAD.
In effect, this is a raunchy sex comedy without any sex. The rough language (definitely R-rated) is at odds with the visual content, which is TV-movie level, or like a 60’s comedy like “Guide for the Married Man.” The verbal content makes this adult. Therefore, to avoid sex as it does, while talking about it constantly, made it obvious that Rock knew what he had to do to get this past a studio, and hopefully to build a movie-style acting career. No, he doesn’t nail Kerry Washington, but comes close, finally realizing he “Loves his wife” as the title goes. The problem is that his life at home has been utterly sexless for years. He and his wife fly to each other’s arms, sing a funny R&B riff, kiss and…cut.
What? Oh, right. You can’t show a black man having sex. I forgot. Now, there actually is some nice sensuality (back rubbing and so forth). And some emotional intimacy—clearly, on an emotional level, he’s having an affair with Washington already. But since I went IN to the movie knowing they would avoid a love scene (but hoping to be pleasantly surprised), I came very very close to considering the entire affair to be cowardice on a gigantic level. Interesting that my wife didn’t see it that way—because of the emotional intimacy aspect. Well, to put it bluntly, that is a mode of thought more common to women than men. In other words, the old stereotype is that men are intimate to get sex, and women are sexual to get intimacy. The relative importance of sex and intimacy are different for men and women. I’ve known bunches of marriages where women put up with husbands having sex outside their marriage—it was their husbands developing emotional intimacy with another woman that freaked them out. And men don’t much care if their wives have gay male friends with whom they bare their souls—but if their wives had sex with another man, that would freak THEM out. At any rate, this is a “tend-to” not an absolute.
But looking at this issue strips this movie pretty bare. Who was it designed to appeal to? My guess: women primarily, black women specifically. There were no white females of any real prominence, so the empathy factor is restricted to those who can empathize cross-race with no problems. White males? I think not. I suspect that a lot of white guys spent the whole movie feeling vaguely uncomfortable because there MIGHT be some sex coming up. That discomfort would put them in the position of criticizing the film for structure, writing, acting, etc. rather than surrendering to the delicious anticipation. Again, I come to this conclusion not from this particular film, but from watching patterns of success and criticism for movies over a course of decades.
Black men? Like I said, human beings like both sensuality and sex, but men like sex. “Romance novels” and “Pornography” occupy similar positions in the female and male psyche, as far as I can see. A little sex in romance novels—but it’s mostly build-up. A little romance/relationship in porn, but its mostly intercourse and variation. So Tananarive literally didn’t consider that it was all build-up and no pay-off.
Of course she, as a black woman, has no problem since if she desires to see herself as a sexual being, she can see it onscreen frequently—as long as the woman is having sex with a white man (note Kerry Washington’s recent turn in LAST KING OF SCOTLAND, for instance.)
It is the persistence of this pattern, and people’s convenient blindness to it, that motivates these blog entries. Like I’ve often said, it isn’t that this, in itself, is so important—it’s that it is a measurable, predictable pattern. And because it is (apparently) unconscious, one cannot tell me that it doesn’t manifest in a thousand other arenas: legal, educational, etc. etc. to the detriment of people outnumbered 10 to one by those with the engrained, unconscious, denied prejudice. Now remember: I’m saying EVERYONE thinks this way—white people are special in no way at all, neither negative or positive. If they were outnumbered 10 to one, it would be black people creating images that emasculate white males.
##
Insofar as the black women thing…if you are a black woman, ask yourself how you would feel if you NEVER saw black men and women making love, and every time you saw a black man making love, it was with a white woman. This has never, ever, ever been a part of cinematic history. Back in the 70’s there was a brief window when black men were treated like human beings in this regard. They mostly made love to black women. Occasionally to a white woman…and black women protested like crazy. But when the shoe is on the other foot, and black women EXCLUSIVELY make love to white men, I hear not a peep from the sisters. No outrage. Of course—if the position was reversed, black men wouldn’t be outraged if black women were excluded. It’s the nature of selfishness and self-centered and conveniently selective blindness.
But I confess to being disappointed. I confess that somewhere deep inside me I’d hoped women were more sensitive, more honest, more compassionate and empathetic than men.
No. They’re not. And that was actually a growing-up point for me. Whites aren’t worse. Women aren’t better. We’re all just in this together.
##
At any rate, Rock and his wife end up in a fully-clothed clinch at the end. Did they have sex? Presumably, although possibly not. They could have given us ten more seconds, Rock and Torres under the sheets—no need for nudity or explicitness. But tenderness and connection, and a rekindling of their marital fires? And there is no indication at all, not the slightest, that this aspect of their marriage has been healed. So…it’s alright to have a marriage where you make love once every two years? All that build-up, and nothing. So…my guess? Black men wouldn’t be happy. White men wouldn’t be happy. I suspect that the quadrant most likely to appreciate it would be black women…and they might well not be happy with the depictions of black women: Kerry as wounded seductress, Torres as Sexless Suzy Homemaker. So Rock has made a movie which, by trying so hard not to offend anyone, ends up pleasing no one.
It is impossible for me to believe that if this movie had been made by white stars, with similar elements, it would have been as sexless. I don’t know about the original film “Chloe in the Afternoon”---maybe there was sex, maybe there wasn’t. But I guarantee you the language wasn’t as raunchy and suggestive, setting up a different tone that they were afraid to pay off.
And I refuse to believe that if this had been made by a black film company for black audiences, distributed to black theaters, they would have had this disturbingly jarring set of elements: raunchy language, PG-content.
Now, there will be some who say “well then, why don’t black people make and finance their own films…” and with all due respect, anyone who says this has no idea what they’re talking about. I know black industry people who have succeeded in doing just this: financing and producing their own films. The struggles they have gone through just to get them released in theater chains has been phenomenal. The movie business—from financing to equipment to processing to distribution to exhibition—is controlled top to bottom by white folks tied to multi-billion dollar multinational conglomerates. In the 1930’s and 40’s there were movies produced for the “Black Belt” of black movie theaters. How many independent movie theaters are left? In the 1970’s there was, as I’ve said, a brief window when cheaply produced movies targeted at specific audiences could make a good profit (“Shaft” cost under 1 million and made over 10).
But now that avenue is called direct-to-video, a second-tier of quality in acting, production, or writing. And in direct to DVD you can find the imagery missing from the big screen. Yes, I know that.
But as I say over and over, the thing that gets to me is that most filmgoers are utterly unconscious of how this selection pressure twists and torques artists. And then, when they look at social statistics about crime, poverty, education, etc, they like to believe that the playing field is level. Folks, this is what you can do:
1) Say “yes the playing field isn’t level and I don’t care. I’ve got mine.” That’s fine, and can be an honest point of view. But people very rarely are this honest.
2) Say “the playing field is level” and that these statistical flukes are just in my mind. Fine. Now explain to me why I’ve been able to predict box office performance for thirty years based upon this single factor, and only been wrong ONCE (“Save the last Dance”)
3) Say “The playing field isn’t level, but I can’t do anything about it. Let me stay asleep and enjoy my movies.” This is the common attitude, and it is held by many millions of good folks. Fine, and I empathize. I have one serious suggestion for you:

Don’t read my blog. This is where I take what is INSIDE my head and put it out where I can analyze it. I place it in public, where anyone in the world can challenge me. It's one of the ways I keep the anger from turning me into those I do not admire.

This is where I tell my truth, pretty or not. God knows someone has to. And God knows I won't see it on the screen. And if you can't tell the truth, you cannot create Art. Chris Rock is in a pickle: he wants to be cuddly and harmless and dangerous all at the same time. And that's a tightrope walk over a cultural shark tank. I wish him well. Hell, I'd even lend him a parasol.

Disney Blogging

Reading “Conservatives without Conscience” by John Dean. His position is that the Conservative movement got hijacked post-Watergate by Republicans desperate to regain the White House, and that Devil’s Bargains were made with some truly ultra-Rightest fanatics, to the point that he has a hard time recognizing the movement any more. He also makes a point about the fact that it is very, very difficult even to define what “Conservatism” is. I’m enjoying it because he speaks of Conservative values that I recognize and appreciate. Because I don’t believe that either side has an exclusive on intelligence, compassion, integrity, or patriotism, it’s been hard to watch some of the stuff going on, because my very real tendency is to come to conclusions that are opposite to my basic position. Looking at the “Big Tent” that Republicans created to bolster their constituency makes big, big sense.
By the way, are there books on the Conservative movement that my readers would recommend? And I mean books by responsible, non-hysterical conservatives. Not interested in anyone who considers Liberals evil: that kind of thinking automatically drops the thinker into the “deluded” category. The same, of course (in my mind) for Liberals who consider Conservatives evil. Just looking to educate myself a bit…
##
Got called at 6:00 this morning by someone on the East Coast who forgot that there’s a 3-hour time difference. I’d like for readers on the East coast to tell me if they have comparable problems with West Coasters calling too late…
##
The Disney black Princess thing gives us another opportunity to turn over the flat rock of the human psyche. Do a web search, find blog talkbacks, and count the percentage of talkers who specifically
1) Complain about Disney going “PC”
2) Complain that if there is a black Princess, why not an Irish princess, a German princess, etc.
3) Specifically complain that blacks are whiners who should just shut up.

One of the three of these makes up about 1/3 of the chatter. White folks like to say that this is a tiny percentage of people doing lots and lots of posting. Really? What if it’s only, say, twice the actual percentage of white Americans who think this way. Wouldn’t that explain voting patterns across the country, really? And the percentage of people who say they wouldn’t vote for a black President? In other words, are you so certain that, given the anonymity of the Internet, these attitudes are far more widespread than you’d like to believe?
Let me rebut, please:
1) Disney has always been “PC.” Just to the other side of the issue, excluding people of color to a remarkable degree from their animation.
2) The logical fallacy here is laughable. This is like saying you have nothing but meat on your plate: how about some fruit and vegetables? And you reply: but there’s no Turkey, either! And no ham!
3) I can understand this one. But believe me, anyone who thinks this would make a horrible black person. They would never have survived the almost daily assault on our sensitivities, and in fact, any white person who thinks this, if they’d been born black, would hate white people. I know the type.
#
Understand something: Disney would 100% have the right to have nothing but white people in their live action or animation. Absolutely. And we, as consumers and observers, would have 100% of a right to call people's attention to this, to deny them our money on this basis, and to label them racists--which they would be, since making decisions on the basis of race is the dictionary definition of the term. If they want to be "America's Entertainment company" they must reflect America as it is. Otherwise, they could honestly be considered "White America's Entertainment company," a label I doubt they'd be proud of. If they were that lesser label in the 20th Century, they have an opportunity to make up for it now. But it behooves us to call a spade a spade (as it were) and acknowledge that their 20th century decisions were made through a regrettable filter...unless that filter is NOT regrettable to them. They are welcome to be as racist as they want. And Americans who think in other fashions would be 100% right in withholding their dollars and approval.

Isn't that the American way?

##
Fasting today, and did Bikram Yoga this morning. My body was screaming for food afterwards, and I shut it up with a Hoodia, thank God. But my energy was great—the room was blisteringly hot, and I never really suffered. We’ll see how I feel tomorrow, though…

Bad morning mood, and last night's "South Park"

Last night, I watched “South Park” for the first time in about a year. I’d damned near forgotten it exists, and last night I remembered why, and unfortunately, it ties together with my feelings around racism and the right. Remember my comment: racism is a disease that lurks on the right, as an excessive egalitarianism and moral relativism lurks on the left. My opinion, o.k?
Hillary Clinton comes to South Park for a rally. Her assistant is black. As they began to make jokes about Hillary’s vagina, I realized that they’d had a point in making her assistant black: I intuited he was going to have some kind of humiliating sex with her. I’ve seen them do this before. By the end of the show, he had thrust his head up there, and exploded. Hmmm. You know, that by itself doesn’t make them racist. One might suggest that they were deliberately playing against social stereotypes. But over the years, I’ve developed a test for attitudes: look at the background characters. The people just walking down the street, out of the animator’s direct window of conscious attention. And on South Park, whether the episode takes place in Colorado, New York, or California, blacks are grossly underrepresented. In essence, the usual time a black character shows up is in a negative or stereotypical context: sports, crime, or making a joke about Affirmative Action.
Those on the right can justifiably scream that it is unfair to associate this with their side of the political aisle. They might say that racism is equally distributed across political lines, or even that there is more of it on the Left. Fine. That has not been my experience. As I’ve said, certainly not all Conservatives are bigots, but most bigots I’ve met HAVE been Conservative. If I hear a talk show host complaining about “forced racial quotas” on Sesame Street (and I have), guess what his politics turn out to be? Or singling out black politicians, rap artists, black “welfare queens” etc…in other words, if 80% of the time a racial reference is negative, I’ve learned over decades of observation what the rest of their political orientation is likely to be, and almost never been wrong.
The boys of South Park doubtless think themselves above this crap. I believe they’ve been described as a kind of neo-Liberarian or something. But around the edges of that, I really smell something. When the only time they have a black character is to make a point about their blackness, and they exclude black people from the unconscious background of their world, sorry…I take that as a sign.
##
On the other hand, apparently Disney is finally doing an animated movie with a black princess. After (as they said on The Daily Show last night) an Asian princess, a native American princess, and countless animal “princesses.” Good for them. But please note the difference between this and the entire 20th century output of the studio. Arguably BILLIONS of character animation images, and not a single one, in a single frame, of a black person. Yes (as I’ve had people point out) there was Uncle Remus. Live action, not animation. Yes, there were crows in “Dumbo” (voiced by white men. I’ve seen film of the recording session, and it wasn’t pretty). Yes, there were purple Muses in “Hercules” apparently voiced by black women. None of these fit the bill, and if you look at it, this crap falls into the “South Park” category.
Conservatives often complain about Liberals pushing a social agenda, forcing minorities into quota situations, etc. In my experience, Liberals are certainly likely to include blacks in a dramatic or comedic work with a bit of compulsion—but rarely above their actual statistical presence in America, if you average out the works. And when I had a chance to speak to animators who worked at Disney in “the old days,” yes indeed I heard stories of racism. It was not benign neglect to have no black people in the two theatrical films to actually take place in AFRICA for God’s sake: “Tarzan” and “The Lion King.” It is, in my mind, a revelation of a mind set in which the unconscious simply doesn’t grant equal humanity to the “other” and doesn’t think about it. This is natural. Point it out to them, and they’ll shove a black person in next time. See? We’re not racist…
Human beings are tribal. But not all human beings are equally likely to define “tribe” along racial terms. That’s what we’re seeing here: the unconscious assumption. The revelation of what someone feels comfortable about. The hatred of Hillary Clinton implied that they would humiliate her sexually—by insulting her body, and having it touched by something disgusting. Animalistic. A dog would have worked. But I guess they have too much affection for dogs, and used the next worst thing.

Evolutionary psychology and human adulthood

I have to correct 100 pages of my new book today and shoot it off to Marco Palmieri at Pocket books before I go to bed tonight. Also have to pack to fly to Philadelphia tomorrow for an Octavia Butler tribute. Then when I get back, I have to re-write a script, break down a book into a film treatment, and get ready to fly to Seattle for Norwescon next week. Then, if I’m lucky, my life slows down to a more normal jog…
##
Today is a fasting day. Start the morning with tea, Hoodia, some vitamins, and a bit of the Amrit Kalash Ayervedic nectar I’ve taken for 10 years. It has a bit of honey and ghee butter in it, but just a spoonful total…don’t think it will have much impact.
I’ve noticed that my dreams are much more intense these days. Hmmm. I think I’ll start working on lucidity again. That’s tons of fun.
##
I like evolutionary psychology, but don’t limit myself to it. I’ll start with the premise that human behavior relates to genetic survival, but not absolutely, and there are definitely short-lived behaviors that are evolutionary dead-ends. Societies evolve based upon human needs, but sometimes go off in the wrong directions. The successful strategies are maintained more often…but then, I’ve seen fabulous human technologies dead-end, while inferior ones thrive. Then again, there are differences between individual and group survival, and limitations to how much of all of this I can grasp. I try to remind myself that I’m probably wrong at least 20% of the time. Minimum.
#
Here’s another view of adulthood, though, based on EP: “that state in which a person can produce (sex), raise (job and security), provide for (short and long term planning) and educate a child in the morals and technologies necessary for THAT child to turn around and do the same thing for the next generation, and for the next generation to, at the least, maintain the values lifestyle and progress of the previous generations.”
Whew. That was clumsy, and should probably be refined. And I’m not implying that if you don’t have kids, you can’t be an adult. I DO believe that having kids is a maturing experience, but not absolutely. Plenty of people with kids are big children themselves—but then, they were before, as well. And plenty of people without children are impressively mature. But they would be CAPABLE of raising kids even if they have chosen not to, or chance has denied them that opportunity.
All I’m saying is that the state of adulthood must relate to some of the biological necessities, and a core one would be the proper care and feeding of the next generation. In fact, if it doesn’t, it would conflict so strongly with biological necessities that I’d have a hard time believing it has anything to do with the deep, balanced needs of the organism.

Just heard that the Senate voted for an Iraq withdrawal next year. Don’t know much about it, but I hope it’s an excellent plan, and am heartened that at least two Republicans were willing to vote with it.
I sincerely hope that it’s a good plan, that Iraqis will take their fates into their own hands, that other forces in the region will assist them. I also hope that the British sailors captured by Iran will return home, and that we don’t buy into what feels like an obvious attempt to create a conflict.
##
What do I mean by that? There are a couple of patterns that emerge: if you want a war, you insult the country involved, rattle sabers, and then park a military vessel juuuuust off their borders, zig-zagging closer and closer, holding “exercises” at the edge of their territorial waters or fly-bys over what they consider their territory. It is probably also useful to fund or otherwise support dissident groups within the target country to increase tension. Eventually, any self-respecting country will take the bait, and you have a war.
My understanding is that our own intelligence agencies say that Iraq has five years of development on their nuclear programs before they would be a threat. In two years, the present administration will be gone. WHOEVER is in next, Democrat or Republican, I would trust far, far more to deal with a situation, both in terms of competence and just sheer honesty. I just don’t trust these people. At all. They’re the worst I’ve ever seen.
Bush, Cheney, and Rice are all hip-deep in the oil business, and coincidentally we find ourselves in a war in a country with the 2nd largest oil reserves AND oil company revenues are at an all-time high AND oil prices are at an all-time high? How many separate answers need to be swallowed not to assume perfidy? Occam’s razor suggests that, at some point, we flip that flat rock and instead of assuming innocence, assume guilt. If there is manipulation on a grand scale, would it explain much of what we’ve seen? And if you combine that with people who hate the concept of "Big Government" and want to cripple it and give that power to Big Business, would it explain even more?
Unfortunately, it requires less imagination to see how the negative scenario could be true than the positive one. Easier to assume a confluence of greedy ideologues than a bunch of accidental events happening to good people who are victimized by fate.
And here’s the rub—even if they have been victimized by unusually negative circumstances, it is outside the realm of common sense to extend trust but so far. Throw them out, get new folks in…and then if the problems repeat, well, it’s the situation, not the people.
#
The connect-the-dots on this is difficult. If you’re smart enough, you make sure that the agreements are made on golf courses and in board rooms with no stenographers present. You assume that your business dealings will be examined, and you make handshake deals that can’t quite be proven.
An analogy to the situation in Iraq can, in my mind, be found in the way America dealt with the Native Americans, Eskimos, Hawaiians…and I would bet that similar patterns can be found in Africa, New Zealand…anywhere a powerful, more developed group comes in contact with a less developed group sitting on desirable land or resources.
So the current administration/ruling class is resistant to your entreaties? Support an opposition group, prop them up with money and power at the same time that you undermine the pre-existing government. Kill, remove or dismantle the old government, then promote the new as the “legitimate voice of the people.” This new voice, coincidentally, is far more amenable to the needs of the Colonizer.
The only game older than this one is to send missionaries and merchants who begin to push HARD at the “natives,” taking their land, insulting their religions and impregnating their women. Predictably, the “natives” will push back. Oops! We have to send in troops to protect them! Before you know it, you have a war, you’ve taken over, and you have a colony.
Yuck. Where ever a colonizing power has taken root, their actions are always legitimate and legal and moral—in the eyes of the colonizer.
I remember the last time I was in Hawaii, and went out of my way to speak with native Hawaiians. I honestly believe that, being a person of color, it was easier for me to get them to open up. And right under the surface, if you spoke quietly and empathetically, was an ocean of resentment, feeling like second-class citizens in their own land. Employed as a servant class for an oblivious tourism that swallowed the party line whole, never considering the implications of the fact that, on Maui for instance, the family of former Missionaries now owns most of the island.
To assume that human greed crosses all color and culture lines allows one to see these patterns without pointing fingers. To assume that in all of these cases them grateful natives were just happy to accept Christ and hand over their land…well, I’m afraid that I could only believe that if there really is a serious differential in intelligence and worth from group A to group B. That is a legitimate point of view, but one I disagree with, and one that is rarely stated explicitly...although obviously many believe it.
If I have lost faith in this presidency, and see too many of their friends and associates getting filthy rich, seen the theories of “trickle-down economics” operating to the benefit of a tiny upper class while the poor suffer in New Orleans…
I’m sorry. The simple answer may not be the right one, but I’m out of reasons not to view the situation through that lens first. At this point, no, I’m not willing to give Bush any more chances. Yes, I’d be in favor of impeachment. Anything, anything at all to get to the next guy…or gal…and see if the situation improves.
God help us if it doesn’t. A slippery slope indeed.
##
I do love kettlebells. No form of weight training has ever attracted me as they do (with the exclusion of Clubbells, which I consider a specific tool for the development of strength and leverage along sports-specific planes of motion. I know people who are using them for general fitness to fantastic effect, but to a certain degree any tool is eccentric to the needs and inclinations of the individual. Very high recommendations for Coach Sonnon’s invention, but I do use them for Specific Physical Preparation rather than General Physical Preparation.)
At any rate, there are interesting criticisms of KB’s on the internet, and some of them are quite legitimate. The best of them suggests that what makes Kbs efficient is the WAY they are used, rather than the tool itself. That dumbbells and barbells can do anything KB’s can do. There is a lot of discussion about centers of mass and so forth to counter these, but the truth is that the major differences really ARE the fact that the training systems are different: there is no isolation exercise in the world of Kettlebells. For instance, a sitting dumbbell Preacher curl is an isolation exercise (to the degree that isolation is even possible. We’ll accept that it is a matter of percentages, not absolutes). A sitting dumbbell curl without the bench involves more of the body. Do the same exercise while standing, and even more of the body is involved. At this point, you are beginning to impact actual sports performance, not merely rehabilitation or appearance. But by the time you are doing a “Clean” movement (which is a “cheat curl” taken to its extreme) you are coordinating the entire body to get that weight to your shoulder. NOW you’re talking about a movement that has applications to every aspect of daily physical motion as well as sports, a general whole-body integration that truly rocks.
KB type movements are sort of “poor man’s Olympic lifts,” and Olympic lifts: Clean and Jerk, Snatch, Squat, Deadlift—are all true whole-body movements with massive carry-over to sports and life.
Not so much the Bench Press (I can think of damned few situations where that particular type of strength: on your back, pushing up, not using the legs or arching the back), even though it is one of the “Big Three” lifts, and develops a truly powerful upper body.
It would certainly be possible for someone to popularize weight programs based on whole-body movements. They’ve been around for centuries. But please note that this just isn’t what happened with body building. One can create a body that “looks great!” with isolation exercises with far greater ease than the same level of appearance with whole-body work. The trick is that the whole-body work is affecting every aspect of fitness: cardiovascular, coordination, balance, strength, basic flexibility…the whole thing. So the isolationist would have to put together an entire package of exercises to equal the same effect.
And of course, most people seeking fitness know what they see in the mirror, which is great, but not all there is.
At any rate, for some reason Kbs have specialized on these whole body approaches. For the first time in my life, I’m really digging iron. Feels good.
##
In the third week playing with Intermittent Fasting, I’m experimenting with truly alternating days of eating and not eating. I used Hoodia to control the hunger yesterday, and it worked fine. No mood swings, no real irritability that I or my family could detect. Woke up this morning feeling randy as hell, after sharp, clear, full-color (and very sexy) dreams. Hmmm.
And I’ve lost almost three more pounds. So…that’s almost six pounds in a little over two weeks. I’d been stuck at about 184 for a while, but boy, that’s over.
Tell you one thing: I’m being VERY careful on eating days to make certain I have all the high-quality, high-nutrient food I can get. Vitamins, fresh vegetables, Ultimate Meal smoothies…I’m making sure that I get all my body needs. My energy level was great—worked yesterday from nine until nine, pretty much constantly before I felt like I had to slow down and get a little entertainment.
Don’t know what I’ll think about this in a few weeks or months, but right now, the thought of increasing health, energy, longevity, cutting fat, saving time and increasing clarity of thought all simultaneously (the thought clarity thing is interesting. If you are healthy aerobically, fasting seems to trigger what might be called a “Predator Response,” a hyperalert state designed to enhance the chances of hunting success. Very cool, and a little spooky. Be interesting to spar in that state…) is just too tempting not to put serious time and research into.
More later.

"Shooter" (2007)

Tony Snow’s cancer has spread to his liver. That’s not even slightly funny, and politics aside, prayers are in order. I wish him well.
#
The question of the stages of life as they relate to gender are certainly fascinating…and potentially divisive. The following thought I found useful, though:
“I think the old woman needs to learn to separate herself from her role as mother, grandmother, etc. To gain some distance from the family. Not to love them less, but achieve some equanimity with respect to the relationships that defined her. Difficult to negotiate and achieve. To learn how to be alone without being lonely.__I believe these two stages of the journey are mostly for women.”
#
Phrased this way, yes they are. However, all human beings must learn to separate themselves from all roles. Men have traditionally taken care of the things OUTSIDE the home…and with retirement, and simple age-related incapacity, must learn to cease identifying themselves with those roles. Those who cannot die within a year of retirement. Ultimately, all external definitions fail.
#
Saw “Shooter,” Mark Wahlberg and director Antoine Fuqua’s new action thriller with serious political overtones. I thought it rocked, but had very definite anti-government leanings that might prevent some from enjoying the fantasy of a lone Marine fighting to clear his name. Interesting that Fuqua is the third black director Wahlberg has worked with: F. Gary Grey (“The Italian Job”) and John Singleton (that odd “black exploitation flick with a white star” “Four Brothers.”) Must be that old Marky Mark magic. Interesting, in the light of our discussions about black sexuality in film, that in none of these does Marky get laid. It’s almost as if the directors are saying: “O.K.—if I can’t have black men having sex, and have to pick up my big paychecks with white stars (directors get approximately 5% of the budget) then I ain’t showing your pale ass either.”
Kinda funny…

At any rate, "Shooter" deals with a Marine sniper (an intense Wahlberg) who is pulled into a web of intrigue, and set up as an accused assassin. He spends 9/10 of the movie trying to clear his name, and that's about all I'll say. Great fun, well-staged action, and some hilariously satisfying conspiracy theory stuff. Tananarive and I were howling. Give it a very solid "B"
#
“24” was great fun last night. I have to admit that if Wayne Palmer dies, my interest in the show decreases. Two seasons ago, “24” had three really strong, intelligent black male characters. Then they killed David Palmer. Then they killed CTU agent Curtis Manning. Both with throat shots, both episodes broadcast on MLK day. That was tasteless as hell. Now Wayne is near death. If he dies, it is impossible for me to look at this as other than deliberate insult. I grew up watching movies where black characters died protecting white people. Maybe I’m being too sensitive…but can anyone out there remember a television show in which every white male character died? Anyone? Ever? In 60 years of television?
#
How much time does the average person spend preparing food and eating it in a day? It occurred to me that the whole IF thing, if it pans out, doesn’t include another fascinating statistic: if the average person spends, say, 3 hours a day eating and preparing food, then that person would save 45 hours a month by going IF—another work week, which is great if you love your work. An additional 12 work weeks a year is another 3 MONTHS every year. That’s 25% increase in useful time on top of the 30-40 percent increase in life span, in addition to the increase in health, energy, healing factors, sexual energy, decreased obesity…
Of course, the IF program is not for children, so some of the benefits of saving time are lost if you have a family. But this is looking spectacularly interesting, if the data holds up. Actually, this is looking like the single most exciting development in health I’ve ever seen.
#
On the subject of adulthood, Wikipedia (God, I love it!) lists the following attributes of an adult:

. Self-control - restraint, emotional control.
. Stability - stable personality, strength.
. Independence - ability to self-regulate.
. Seriousness - ability to deal with life in a serious manner.
. Responsibility - accountability, commitment and reliability.
. Method/Tact - ability to think ahead and plan for the future, patience.
. Endurance - ability and willingness to cope with difficulties that present themselves.
. Experience - breadth of mind, understanding.
. Objectivity - perspective and realism.
##
Look at the following:
1) A career that brings personal satisfaction, financial reward and social contribution.
2) A healthy, energetic body that YOU would find sexually alluring (modified for age, of course. But I can think of no good reason not to be in the top 5% of your age group in fitness and health!)
3) A healthy, passionate relationship with a mature adult Significant Other.
4) A bountiful inner life of prayer and meditation as a daily pattern.

I would think that a person who can accomplish those four things is an adult in almost any meaningful sense of the word. Certainly, a woman who negotiates with her partner to remain home with the kids is exactly as contributory as the one who makes the living—I’m not trying to put down Domestic service at all. A man who stays home while his WIFE goes out to earn a living will have a bit more trouble being respected by the world, however—I’ve seen some real problems crop up there. In multiple cases, the problem was that the woman stopped being attracted to him, and started affairs with a dynamic man at work. Ah well…
#
I keep trying to zero in on the most critical aspects of this whole “The young person grows up, and the old person faces death” (satisfied, Suzanne?) aspect of the structure of myth and fiction. I can feel pretty confident on the first aspect. I would say that if you have the following things, you’ve made it:
1) An accurate reality map, and a way to test it to failure.
2) An accurate assessment of where you are in your life’s journey.
3) A clear set of balanced goals.
4) The ability to tell the truth.
5) The ability to keep your word…especially to yourself.
6) Empathy for other human beings.

I think that children rarely have any of these things. And by inference, working to develop these attributes is a gateway to adulthood.

Letter and Answer

I just received a letter asking for help on some specific, and very common issues. Here are the queries, and my responses. All of my answers are based on my current understanding of organizing life to produce Adulthood--the first major gateway. My answers are marked "Steve"
##

"I think the best way to describe what is bothering me is I feel stuck.  I'm talking about life as a whole, I just feel stuck.   Maybe I am lacking a sense of direction?  I recently graduated college.  I have goals and dreams but no clear way to get there, at present.   My energy levels are down.  My drive/desire sky-rockets for a brief time, a day or so, and then it is almost none existent.   I feel like I'm a slave to procrastination or laziness.  The things I want to start get no further than off the ground, if they get that far.   The things I want to quit always seem to creep back."
##
STEVE: You need to have WRITTEN goals in all three major areas of your life: career, relationships, fitness. All three. Then plot out your first 1-year's worth of work to accomplish them. Start moving. Inevitably, one of the three will be a bear. But the more clearly you define what you wish, and what there is to be done along the way, the easier it is to begin.
##
" To be completely honest, I have become afraid.  I'm not really sure how to get myself away from it.   I have some friends that tell me I am selling myself short.  The sad part is I know that's true.  I've read books upon books about ways to beat procrastination or how to increase your output.   Once I do manage to start something I never maintain it to completion.  As a child I used to feel I could accomplish anything.   Surprisingly, I would prove myself right regularly.  Somewhere, somehow I lost that innate belief in myself and I don't know how to get it back."
##
STEVE:
There are only a few really basic approaches to maximizing your efficiency as a human being (from my humble POV):
1) Balanced, written goals.
2) The ability to act despite the voices in your head (!)
3) Scathing honesty about where you currently are, your strengths and weaknesses
4) The ability to keep your word
5) At least one ally you can share your dreams with.
#######
Energy is critical. It can be most rapidly increased through clarity of goals. Most people with "low energy" wouldn't know what to do with the energy if they had it. After that, energy is probably most clearly seen as a confluence of several factors
1) Fitness. Especially aerobic fitness. But Stretching/relaxation exercises like yoga can help teach you not to waste the energy once you have it.
2) Diet. A major energy killer. Most people take in entirely too many simple processed carbohydrates, and not enough fruit and vegetables. And their water intake is WAY too low.
3) Rest. I can't believe how people get 5-7 hours of sleep and then complain about being tired all the time. What the #$@@ do they expect? If you can thrive on this little sleep, good for you!! But if energy is an issue, this can be a damned good place to look.
##
And never, ever, underestimate the power of fear. It will lock your emotional emergency brakes on, and you'll burn yourself out fighting just to creep forward. Fear can often be defeated with clarity, and clarity can be obtained through a regular meditative practice. "Heartbeat Meditation" is fantastically powerful for those with the ability to stick with it. Journaling is also great, but make no mistake: your personal garbage will come up. All of it. And it will feel like hell, believe me.

This is where you have to have faith, and solid allies.

Good luck!

Detox and Human Adulthood

Intermittent Fasting note: A little feeling of “detoxification” this morning, as if my body is burning more fat, and some fat-soluble toxins are dumping. Have to increase my water intake. I’ve dropped two pounds in four days, and that wasn’t my intent with this new plan…
##
Prayers to John and Elizabeth Edwards. I’m not sure about him continuing on the campaign trail, though. Fighting cancer is hugely energy-intensive. On the other hand, seeing her husband in the White House might be the kind of goal that energizes the lady. I trust they’ll make a responsible choice.
##
More thoughts on the “Human Adulthood” thing, which keeps running around in my mind. There is a saying in writing circles that there are only two stories: “the young man grows up” and “the old man faces death.” Interesting. Growing up, and Enlightenment? If Growing Up is taking complete responsibility for yourself in all major aspects, and Enlightenment is opening the perceptual doors ordinarily only unsealed at death, then applying the structures of the Hero’s Journey to these would be valuable, I’d think. We’ve looked at the first one: accepting responsibility for yourself, dealing with the fear, setting out to learn the skills of adulthood, gathering proper allies, confronting failure, learning who and what to have faith in (including self), and teaching others.

What would the other half be? Accepting the inevitability of death (Elizabeth Kubler-Ross’s final step?), dealing with the fear, working to cast aside illusions, gathering mature and/or spiritual allies, confronting crisis, destroying the ego-shell while maintaining faith that something…even if it is beyond your current understanding, will remain. Then, if you make it through before physical death, if you choose to communicate with ordinary humans you have to put the tatters of your ego-shell back on and try to teach that which cannot be taught. Fascinating…

Thursday Morning Thoughts

Hmmm…I was asked how to prevent getting crabby at the end of a fast. I’m still a neophyte at this, but I know that Hoodia, for instance, has a mild euphoric effect that seems to work well. You might try some Chamomile tea, for instance. On the other hand, it might be interesting to specifically, especially monitor your behaviors for the last two hours of a fast, just as an exercise in control and balance…
##
I've noticed some energy irregularities. Went to bed early last night, even though I had a short nap in the afternoon. And my digestion seemed a bit gassy. Could be coincidence...
##
David Brin’s post on the Bush administration implies that he is running out of motivation to believe that what they are doing is the result of “mere” stupidity, and is now shading into evil. Wow. David’s one of the brightest guys I know (we went to High School together) so I can’t wait to sit him down for dinner and get him to explain that one more fully.

Me, I think that they have an a priori set of reality maps. This includes America at the center of the universe, absolute evil, essence preceding existence, and the willingness to trade on fear and hate to solidify a political base. Their trust in business seems to rise higher than their trust in government, that’s for sure. And that old devil Military Industrialist Complex seems to be headed for record growth. Also, we’re getting a good look at what happens when a big chunk of the administration has ties to Big Oil.
#
There’s a theory I came up with years ago that any organization that grows large enough that the members can no longer recognize each other by sight will take on its own identity, with its own needs and desires. (I’ve heard that there’s an economist who posited the same thing, by the way, but haven’t read his work). This would apply to both governments and businesses, by the way. It is just as insane to believe businesses will solve everything as it would be to think governments will do it. Some balance is needed, and I think everyone agrees with that—the disagreement is primarily in what that balance would look like.

But I think that somehow, this vile stew, combined with America behaving in a typical two-dimensional fashion post 9/11 (I mean typical for ANYONE who’s been attacked, not typical for America) and playing “follow the leader” created an absolute nightmare. Combine this with the fact that Bush is barely competent as a chief executive, and you have a situation where the emperor not only has no clothes, but seems determined to wag his penis at the world and expect them to bow in shock and awe. Evil? I don’t think so. But since these guys seem to believe in absolutes, I’ll say that if I was of their mind set, yes, I would think them evil.

Even if they started the war to get Iraqi oil, it’s possible that in their hearts they just believe they’re doing what America wants and needs. Of course, the fact that these actions put money in their and their friend’s pockets is an accidental by-product.

Man, the Cheney situation is a perfect example. No, I don’t think there is a “smoking gun” proving he is a Halliburton mole. Hell, there doesn’t need to be. Any deals were made on golf courses and over brandy at the club. He would enter the Bush administration (after nominating himself), and work to steer mucho business their way. After he leaves the administration, he will be fully, completely taken care of for life. Nothing on paper. Nothing prosecutable. Right out in plain sight. Plenty of no-bid contracts, and nothing but an “understanding” to tie it all together. That’s the way to do something like this.

But God in heaven…if there is a single piece of evidence tying together all of this death and misery… I just don’t want to go further in my thoughts in a public forum. Let’s just say that I think America let the Fox (network) guard the hen house.
##
That Obama attack ad on Hillary is hysterical. No, I don’t think he had anything to do with it. But it does indicate that this next election cycle is going to be mucho entertaining. Right now, he has my vote—his apparent clarity on Iraq is a chunk of it. Much of the rest is just the fact that he actually sounds like a leader, a man with ideas and a philosophy. A politician to be sure…but if he wasn’t he wouldn’t stand a chance, and it would be foolish to back him. Saw him on Larry King Live and I think he was tired…fumbled a bit on some questions, until he found solid ground again.

The race issue is interesting, for sure, but I never even considered voting for Al Sharpton or Jesse, so I don’t think that factors in much. One way or the other, this is going to be fun to watch.

Morning Thoughts

Up at 5 this morning for my time with Sensei Tim and his madmen. Interesting thing about that: the hypnogogic state is alive, man, and I can hear my subconscious roaring at me, all the reasons why I should just roll over and go back to bed…
##
I think that one of the reasons the Intermittent Fasting thing catches my attention has to do with the differences between it and the Caloric Restriction approach. CR has been on my radar for 15 years, and I figured I’d get around to it one day…but REALLY didn’t like what seemed to be an OCD level of planning and denial. IF is so much simpler it’s spooky. Doesn’t make it easier, though…especially if you have emotional associations with food.

And this is one of the ways I find it interesting. Clearly, one must have a mature attitude toward caloric intake. The Child part of our personalities will scream and hop around on this one. I want! I want! I’m uncomfortable! I suspect that anyone who can actually handle the every-other-day eating program, in whatever way it is tried, is already miles more conscious than the average person. What a wake-up call! I would be tempted to call it a potential way to facilitate adulthood by learning to override unconscious behavior patterns intended to help us to full growth as children…but lead to obesity and illness in adulthood. More thought on this later, of course.

I’m trying the “Eat only after six one day, and then until six the next” approach. This gives 24 hour fasts, but you’re still eating every day. I may switch to the simpler every-other-day program. After all, THAT’S the one that has been experimentally verified. Can anyone think of a reason that the 6-6 program might not work as well?
##
I think the Bush administration definitely can sense a trap when they see one. Their reluctance to let Rove or Harriet Meyers testify under oath makes me think they fully remember what happened with Clinton, where a minor offense became an impeachable offense due to lying under oath. In my mind, the Republicans used that trap well. Let’s see what happens when it’s turned on them. Especially since I have the very bad feeling that this administration will go down in history as the most corrupt and inept in a century. And no, it isn’t my opinion that matters a damn. I think this will be the judgment of history, and of political pundits on both sides of the aisle. I have never, ever, ever seen so many blunders and bad doings under one roof. This is appalling.

More on Caloric Restriction

“Caloric restriction every other day works on people? Wow. I'd only heard of it before in rats.”

I’m not saying it works the same way. Here’s what I know.

1) Caloric restriction (30-40% reduction in average calorie intake while preserving all nutritional values) increases remaining life span by about 50% in all warm blooded animals it’s been tested on. It also has a positive effect on cancer, diabetes, heart disease, and of course obesity. When rats are kept on such a diet from birth, you get small skinny rats that are abnormally healthy, and live a very long time.
2) If you start such a program after the rats have matured, you increase their remaining life span by 50%.
3) Human experimentation, begun (perhaps) by Roy Walford Phd, produces skinny people who claim great healthy and superior biological markers. For instance: 55-year olds who have been using CR for over a decade had blood chemistry comparable to 20 year olds.
4) CR represents the ONLY life extension approach with this level of scientific backing: both experimental and theoretical.
5) Rat (or mouse) experiments were conducted by feeding every other day. Someone wondered if it was the meal spacing, rather than the caloric restriction, that gave them the positive results. They tried feeding every other day, but allowing the mice to eat all they wanted on those days. The result? The mice ate as much as the uncontrolled mice, but lived 50% longer, and were at least as healthy (and larger than!) the CR mice.
6) Humans who have tried “Intermittent Fasting” report blood chemistry changes similar to CR testing.
7) Several methods of IF have been proposed: eating every other day. Eating in one 3-hour block at night (“The Warrior Diet” for instance). Eating until 6pm one day, and not until 6pm the next. Some preliminary, anecdotal data suggests that all of these have some positive effect.
8) There are various theories about the mechanisms involved in CR and IF. These include: decreased obesity contributing to health. Decreased caloric intake makes people more careful of the calories they DO consume, increasing overall quality of nutrients. Fasting allows the digestive system to recover from the stress of digestion (and the ph in the mouth to stabilize, protecting tooth enamel!) Fasting places stress on the system, triggering a health/fitness response to improve hunting ability. Fasting simulates EXTERNAL environmental stress: your hindbrain believes there is a famine or war, and decreases the “death drive” to protect tribal population levels (!!)

This is all really fascinating. I remember reading “The 120 Year Diet” by Walford, and thinking that the CR theories made perfect sense, but it felt like too much deprivation, and the people who practiced it looked scrawny and weak. Wasn’t interested.

But frankly, IF sounds doable, especially if the benefits are anything similar to those gained by lab animals in controlled experiments. A pill that provided the values would be the hottest drug in history. A single technique that increases lifespan by up to 50%? Cancer? Heart disease? Obesity? Diabetes? Increases energy? Good Lord—it’s the magic bullet.
##
Now, as to hunger pains. Drinking tea or diluted juice could handle some of this. An herb like Hoodia could deal with more. My suspicion is that COMPLEX carbohydrates and proteins are the things to be avoided on “fasting” days. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if fruits, light salads, and vegetable juices were just fine.

But time will tell. I’m fascinated, because I’ve always had the number “120” in my mind in terms of life span, and something like this actually puts that number in shooting distance. So…until (and unless) I find a good reason not to, I’m experimenting with the “eat until six, then only after six) approach while I continue research. Any of you who find more data, please send it in. Meanwhile, I’ll report back what I’m experiencing.

Intermittent Fasting?

Was doing some research on diet, which led me to Roy Walford's caloric restriction (the 120-year diet), which is based on the only legitimate, experiementally backed-up life extension approach I know of. But that led me to something called IF--intermittent Fasting, or eating every other day. More on this later, but right now I'm shocked. It seems to have all of the health benifits of caloric restriction, without the caloric restriction. Mice allowed to eat every other day ate as much as rats given free access to food--but lost weight, and were healthier by a dozen different markers. If this is legit, it implies a pretty safe, simple approach to health, lifespan, and weight. Has anyone out there heard of IF?

http://www.life-enhancement.com/article_template.asp?ID=851

Reply to Frank

“Supporting the troops” means supporting the war.__Here is my position on this, having served in the military myself:"

Frank, I appreciate your service, but you aren’t qualified to answer this question, really. I asked if anyone had data about what ACTIVE servicemen thought on the issue of bringing them home, and debating bringing them home: whether such a discussion equates to “not supporting” them. On the other hand, it would be perfectly reasonable for you to suggest that a survey of FORMER servicemen might be valuable on this issue as well, in which case, your opinion would be pertinent. Even then, however, you didn’t answer the specific question. So then it would have been appropriate to propose a different test, asking a different question—in which case your response would be valuable. Even so, thank you.
##
I would suspect that one aspect of “supporting the troops” would have to be getting them home alive to raise their sons and daughters and love their wives and continue their lives. I think it would be fair to ask active servicemen if they would be offended if we discuss this option.
##
“Now if you try to say "supporting Iraqis" means supporting the average Iraqi; and if you conclude that the average Iraqi "wants us to go away" are you also saying that the average Iraqi wants to live under another Saddam?”

No, I’m saying that the average Iraqi might well believe that they are capable of sorting this situation out, and might also believe that we are making it worse, not better. We may disagree…in which case are YOU saying they haven’t the right to decide?
##
“ Are you saying that the average Iraqi doesn't want political and economic freedom? If we conducted a tally by plebiscite, are you saying that more people would vote for dictatorship then freedom? It may seem an absurd choice, but perhaps you do believe this. “

My, that straw man you’re building is looking kinda shakey. I’m saying that the average Iraqi probably wants freedom and security, and may well doubt that Americans have their best interest at heart. And if this is what the majority of them think (and I’m not saying it is) and you believe that they haven’t the right to decide this, isn’t that the kind of paternalistic attitude that, at the core of it, is saying “we’re better than they are.” And “we know better than they do?” And it isn’t even “we,” Frank, because much of America now disagrees with you. Which puts you in the position of saying that the 37% of Americans who want to stay (if that number is right) know what’s good for the Iraqis better than the Iraqis do…AND the majority of Americans do. All right, that's possible, but that’s a mighty big load of hubris, isn’t it?
##

“So if you decide that the vast majority of people are choosing freedom in Iraq,and you know that to construct such institutions you need to first provide security from those who are ideologically against freedom, then clearly supporting the Iraqis means doing whatever is necessary to see that their wish for economic and political freedom is fulfilled.__”
What? Even if it is against their will? Even if they believe that we’re making the situation worse, and they’re capable of providing their own security and running their own country? This is, in my mind, not supporting them. It is infantilizing them. And I fail to see how you can respect someone enough to think them capable of managing a democracy, and simultaneously be willing to disrespect their wish for you to GET THE HELL OUT OF THEIR HOUSE.
If the position was reversed, and someone said they were “freeing you” and you did not trust them, and asked them to leave and they would not, you would probably consider yourself within your rights to kill that person to get them out. That’s the position that we have placed our men and women in, if the average Iraqi wants us out.

By what right do we say we’re correct, and have the right to tell them, against their wishes, what to do? If that isn’t tyranny, I don’t know what is. IF WE SAY THEY DON’T HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASK US TO LEAVE, our claim to be “supporting freedom” looks shoddy.
##

“What's more, I feel we have a responsibility to fix what we broke.”
Now, here is where I think the moral rubber is meeting the road. I believe that many who hold your point of view are good and moral people. Who grasp that their support of the war, has created fantastic damage and disruption. If we leave now, there is an inevitable negative balance at the Karmic bank. But if we can just, somehow fix it, then we can hold our heads high. But this is almost exactly the kind of reasoning that compulsive gamblers use when they’ve lost the mortgage. Let me stay at the table just a little longer. Just let me dip into the college fund…
So, yes, if we stay there is a chance of straightening things out. If we leave, there is a chance that the Iraqis may straighten it out for themselves, perhaps with the help of their neighbors. Of, if we stay, things might get worse. Or if we leave, things might get worse. Here’s an apparent difference between you and me, Frank: I would be willing to trust the Iraqis to decide. Apparently, you would not. I interpret that as I accept that they are adults, masters of their own fates. You seem to want to think they are children. And you know what? If the people who agree with you on keeping our military there also think they are children…well, then, by God they are children sitting on the world’s 2nd largest oil reserves, and it is mighty, mighty hard for me to believe that we’d let “children” keep control of it. It makes it easier to believe that those who would profit by controlling it would LOVE you to have that belief, Frank.
I don’t know what is true…but I do know I’d be willing to trust the Iraqis to decide their own future. And if we don’t, regardless of the stated intentions, we’re just another dictatorial power saying we’re doing what we’re doing “for the people.”
##
“We start by intending to change the equation in the Middle East by undermining dictatorships (which abound) and instituting Democratic institutions. We start with the biggest bully on the block, because everyone knows that if you stand up and take down the big _bully, others will respect you”
No, Frank. We started by believing we were retaliating for 9/11 and preventing an attack on American soil by WMDs. Everything else you’re saying is the excuse tacked on afterwards, when the Emperor proved to have no clothes. Isn’t your memory a bit short here? I don’t blame you though—the Right Wing noise machine has been repeating this 24/7 for years.
##
“Now I have to ask, how did you come by this insight? I mean what evidence did you use given that all major intelligence organizations believed he did have WMDs? You know, recently I went back to the discussion groups I was involved in around the time of the beginning of the war (I wasn't blogging back then). And you know what I found? I found that everyone who opposed going to war also thought Saddam had WMDs, and that US troops would get slaughtered in Baghdad as a result. One prominant member who held such a position predicted what would happen if we invaded__""What's next?" indeed. Wait for the UN to decide upon a mandate, refuse to concur, launch a unilateral invasion, kill thousands of civilians, storm Baghdad, become exposed to a cocktail of chemicals, bacterium and poisonous gases,"__

I found that everyone, right and left believed he had them.__Of course now, all of a sudden, no one believed it. And especially the politicians who voted for war are all now claiming they were misled by Bush, even though there is a record of them stating the opposite before anyone even knew who Bush was.__But not you.”

##
Frank, you’re being frantic here. You have said two things that are simply not true—and I’ve come to expect better of you. First you say “Everyone, left and right, believed he had them.” You don’t literally mean this. You mean “the majority.” Then you say “now, all of a sudden, no one believed it.” That is also untrue. You mean to say “now the majority of people claim they didn’t believe it” or something of the like, correct? You’re forgiven. But I'm guessing that this is actually how you feel, that the world really does seem so black and white to you. If so, lighten up guy.
##
But as to how I “knew” Saddam didn’t have them, it was based on psychological observation, not evidence, and I FULLY admit that I knew I could have been wrong, and know that even though I was correct, it might have been a coincidence, all right?

And here was my reasoning: He was born in 1937, and in 2001 was 63 or 64 years old. During his last expansion push, in 1991 (the first gulf war) he was 53-54. He got totally spanked, just ass-rammed and told to put Kuwait back. Ten years later, he is completely over his testosterone flush, really on the downside. He was no longer in his prime empire-building risk-taking phase. It’s the age and ass-ramming TOGETHER that say this to me—not either of them separately. Why in the world would he want to screw with the U.S. like that? I figured he knew he had no hope of really hurting us. The only thing that would happen is getting thumped even worse. This man was no religious fanatic, trusting in rewards in Paradise. He was a greedy, violent, power-hungry murderous bastard, with the fears that all such people have at their core. He was a bully, and like all bullies, is afraid of the bigger kid who has already kicked his ass. At his age, having just had his ambitions thoroughly destroyed, I figured he would be more interested in enjoying his declining years as a comfortable billionaire, rather than beginning an action that could go no where, and do nothing except lead to his sons’ death, and him being dragged out of a hole and hung. The man wasn’t an idiot. So…I sat back and watched the U.N. inspectors. Saddam blustered and protested—of course. Hell, he was a Strong Man dictator. There was no way he could just roll over for us without seeming weak and thereby exposing his throat to rivals. (Frankly, I think we had people smart enough to know that, and that that reaction was part of the plan—to force a confrontation by humiliating him into acting “guilty.” Predictable, predictable, predictable. Like doing fly-bys over his territory, trying to tempt him into taking a shot. Here, doggie doggie…nice piece of meat….oh! Surprise! He snapped! Rev up those missiles!) That seemed basic psychology to me: expect him to posture. But the more the inspectors moved around and found nothing, the more confident I felt in my original assessment.
##
I know that many, many good and intelligent people (some certainly smarter than me) believed WMDS were there, in BOTH parties. But not “everyone.” I am not suggesting that only wrong-headed or stupid people did. I know that my reasoning might have only accidentally led me to the right conclusion. I get that. But that was exactly, precisely, my thought process on the subject, and in the spirit of full disclosure I offer it to you warts and all.