New posts at Many Years Young 5/31/11

A Memory Tonic for the Aging Brain

Walking counts as exercise

How Four Legs Can Help You Stay Fit

Age Is No Barrier to Muscle Building

Plus lots more.

New posts at Many Years Young 5/30/11

Put your stress on vacation

Our body’s old response to modern stress can be dangerous

Quick Ways to Reduce Stress

Stress, Sleep & Your Weight

Plus lots more.

New posts at Many Years Young 5/29/11

Have a Safe Barbeque This Memorial Day

There’s an app for summer grilling

Don’t Let Food Poisoning Spoil Your Picnic

Unusual Ways to Lose Weight

Plus lots more.

New posts at Many Years Young 5/28/11

McConnell says Medicare to be part of deficit deal

Sedentary Jobs Helping to Drive Obesity Epidemic

On-the-Job Activity Boosts Americans’ Exercise Levels

Reasons to take “me” time for exercise

Plus lots more.

New posts at Many Years Young 5/27/11

U.S. Southeast ‘Stroke Belt’ Also Shows Higher Rates of Cognitive Decline

Tired? 3 Causes of Fatigue You May Not Know

4 Ways to Lower Your Blood Pressure

Eating Tomatoes Can Lower Bad Cholesterol

Plus lots more.

Why aren’t our elected representatives representing the needs of us, the voters? Because of their dependence on big campaign contributions. The corruption is so pervasive that many politicians don’t even think much about it any more.

They will continue to favor big contributors until we the people take the money out of politics. What Brent Budowsky proposes below is for big Democratic donors to level the playing field—for now—after the Supreme Court gave rich people the right to buy all the elections they want to.

But he also challenges those of us who want truly representative government to start a new revolution in America. We can initiate and promote a constitutional amendment to disallow unlimited political contributions. Working at the state level to get approval of the amendment will give progressives the opportunity to make the case to our friends and neighbors that the Republicans’ war on workers, women, children, older Americans, the poor, and the unfortunate is not how we want our country run.

Is this an issue that could finally unite progressives? If not, we give up our right to complain about the Republican agenda.

It’s time to put up or shut up.

Brent Budowsky:

Fight harder, Dems

I have spent a lifetime advocating campaign reform, and do so today. I also support Democratic groups such as Priorities USA, House Majority PAC and Majority PAC and their partner groups that accept large donations from undisclosed donors. Here’s why:

The campaign finance law should be changed, but until it is, both parties should play by the same rules. Vince Lombardi never suggested his Green Bay Packers should have three downs when they had the ball, while their opponents should have four…

Republican and conservative financiers will continue to aggressively exploit current law through very large and undisclosed donations. I disagree with Karl Rove, members of the Koch family and others, but they are playing by the legal rules. Their Democratic and progressive counterparts should play by the same rules, or they surrender to Republicans a powerful advantage in a high-stakes election.

In my view the Citizens United decision was one of the most radical and wrongheaded decisions since the Supreme Court considered slavery. It is appalling that two justices made speeches that gave the appearance to many of grave conflicts of interest that should have required recusal.

I support a constitutional amendment to reverse the Citizens United decision and statewide initiatives to promote campaign reform and increase disclosure. Polling suggests these actions would be supported by large majorities of voters.

The 2012 election involves historically high stakes and could be decided by razor-thin margins of victory. These elections should not be decided because Republicans take legal donations and Democrats do not, or because Republican donors fight harder for victory than Democratic donors…

As the 2012 elections approach, this will be apparent to Democratic donors large and small. We are entering a political war for the ages. Every Democratic hand should be on deck.

New posts at Many Years Young 5/26/11

Substance in Tangerines Fights Obesity and Protects Against Heart Disease, Research Suggests

Healthy Gut Flora Could Prevent Obesity, Rat Study Suggests

Lecithin Component May Reduce Fatty Liver, Improve Insulin Sensitivity

Protein Drinks After Exercise Help Maintain Aging Muscles

Plus lots more.

Washington Wire:

The message President Barack Obama wrote in the guest book during a tour of Westminster Abbey Tuesday has the wrong date — May 24, 2008.

Maybe he just wishes it were still 2008. That’s when adoring crowds swooned at his feet.

Think Progress:

Democrat Kathy Hochul Beats Republican Jane Corwin In New York’s 26th District

[Yesterday], Democrat Kathy Hochul defeated Republican state Assemblywoman Jane Corwin in New York’s special election to replace former Rep. Chris Lee (R-NY). Despite the $2.36 million spent by groups like Karl Rove’s American Crossroads and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to keep the district red and the $60 per vote Corwin spent herself, Hochul secured a clear victory in a traditionally Republican district:

Greg Sargent:

The arguments against reading too much into the results are that Hochul was simply a better, more focused candidate than her GOP rival; the third-party candidate helped swing the race to Dems; and that special elections by nature don’t tell us too much. But the rough consensus among analysts sifting through the numbers is that even if you acknowledge those factors, the race was still a clear referendum on Ryancare and suggests Medicare could be a major factor in 2012 — if Republicans don’t rethink their handling of it.

Did Republicans overreach with Ryan’s stupid plan to replace Medicare? Not according to its proposer. He says Hochul’s win was due to the scare tactics the Democrats used. So to him, telling the truth is a scare tactic.

Washington Wire:

Ryan: ‘Mediscare’ Campaign Cost GOP the NY-26 Race

At least one Republican got the message, though.

Political Wire:

Snowe Comes Out Against Ryan Budget Plan

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) has become the latest Republican senator to announce her opposition to House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) proposed Medicare changes, the Portland Press Herald reports.

But apparently our historic progressive president didn’t.

Marcy:

One corner of real America just made it very clear they don’t want anyone messing with Medicare. And yet Obama’s off negotiating just that, rather than making it clear that Republicans want to hold Medicare hostage along with the rest of the government.

Truthdig:

Wisconsin Is Ready for a Feingold Comeback

A year and a half after voters gave him the boot, former Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold is poised to get his old job back. A new poll shows Feingold leading four hypothetical opponents in the 2012 Senate race by double digits, boasting favorability ratings deserved by one of the great Senate champions.

Crooks and Liars:

GOP Rep. Rob Woodall On Medicare: Suck it up and take care of yourself

Because it’s just so easy, don’t you know? Think about what this guy is really saying. He’s saying that senior citizens should either go bankrupt or without health care unless they’re lucky enough to have the money to pay for it. He’s assuming everyone would somehow manage to have the means to get necessary care and Medicare is just a crutch!

You should even be able to take care of yourself when Wall Street Robber barons destroy your life savings.
Huffington Post:

Retirement And The Recession: Savings Destroyed For One Out Of Four Older Workers, Says AARP Survey

When are those thieves who nearly brought down the world’s financial system going to be indicted? They’re not, but John Edwards is going to be indicted.
Political Wire:

Prosecutors Will Seek Edwards Indictment

The Department of Justice “has green-lighted the prosecution of former presidential candidate John Edwards for alleged violations of campaign laws while he tried to cover up an extra-marital affair,” ABC News reports.

Think Progress:

GOP Congressman Pays For Emergency Disaster Relief With Cuts To Clean Cars Program

GOP Presidential Candidate Herman Cain Led Radical Group That Accused Democrats Of Wanting To Kill ‘Black Babies’

After Leading Iraq War Cheerleading, GOP Rep. Davis Concedes It Was A ‘Mistake,’ ‘Gross Error’

After Calling The Auto Rescue ‘Tragic,’ Mitt Romney Now Claims He ‘Had The Idea First’

Texas Judge Blocks Naming Street For Cesar Chavez Amid Fears Of The ‘Minority Becoming A Majority’

Rick Perry Signs Controversial Bill Requiring Women To Get Sonogram 24 Hours Before An Abortion

Across The Country, Conservatives Shift Taxpayer Dollars From Public to Private Schools

AFL-CIO:

Republicans Aiming to Take Away Voting Rights in 36 States

Undernews:

Public schools charging students through fees

Political Wire:

Lawmaker Pulls Gun on Photographer

Think Progress:

New Jersey Supreme Court Orders State To Restore $500 Million In Education Funding Stripped By Gov. Christie

Undernews:

Like a hit and run driver, America’s elite has left the scene of the accident. More and more, those who run this country have the character of wealthy, isolated strangers — armed but afraid, intrusive yet indifferent, personally profligate but politically penurious, priggish in rhetoric yet corrupt in action. No longer does national myth connect them with the greater mass of America. Nor, any longer, does politics separate them from each other; Republicans and Democrats have become, rather than choices, degrees of the same dismal thing.. - Sam Smith

New posts at Many Years Young 5/25/11

Acetaminophen Linked to Lower Prostate Cancer Risk in New Study

‘Superfruits’ may not help against cancer

Simply Eating Less Fat May Cut Diabetes Risk

Cooked Right, Fish Can Help a Woman’s Heart

Plus lots more.

Mr. Fish:

Chris Hedges:

The liberal class, which attempted last week to discredit the words my friend Cornel West spoke about Barack Obama and the Democratic Party, prefers comfort and privilege to justice, truth and confrontation. Its guiding ideological stance is determined by what is most expedient to the careers of its members. It refuses to challenge, in a meaningful way, the decaying structures of democracy or the ascendancy of the corporate state. It glosses over the relentless assault on working men and women and the imperial wars that are bankrupting the nation. It proclaims its adherence to traditional liberal values while defending and promoting systems of power that mock these values…

The liberal class, despite becoming an object of widespread public scorn, prefers the choreographed charade. It will decry the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan or call for universal health care, but continue to defend and support a Democratic Party that has no intention of disrupting the corporate machine. As long as the charade is played, the liberal class can hold itself up as the conscience of the nation without having to act. It can maintain its privileged economic status. It can continue to live in an imaginary world where democratic reform and responsible government exist. It can pretend it has a voice and influence in the corridors of power. But the uselessness and irrelevancy of the liberal class are not lost on the tens of millions of Americans who suffer the indignities of the corporate state. And this is why liberals are rightly despised by the working class and the poor.

Riverdaughter:

I read Robert Cruikshank’s analysis of the problems facing the Democrats and now I finally understand why the party is f^&*ed up beyond all recognition.  Cruikshank thinks there are two factions, the neoliberals and the progressives, that are fighting each other…

If those are the only choices, if those are the only people the Democrats see, no wonder they are having problems keeping their act together.  They have completely lost it.

The rest of us are working people of all professions and education levels who don’t give a damn about these petty ideological squabbles.  No.  Our issues are economic ones.  We care about jobs, wages, health care…

Until you address the ECONOMY and UNEMPLOYMENT and reinstitute NEW DEAL PROGRAMS and RULES that protect us, your message will continue to fall on deaf ears.  We’re tired of purists on either side of the Democratic party insisting on poison pills that demonstrate time and again that they are not aware of all of the ground we working people are losing…

If people like Cruikshank want to win next year, they’d be better off losing the fricking labels and hire the best man or woman for the job to handle a very tough economic environment.   Cornell West academic types are abandoning the party.  Unions are abandoning the party.  Regular working and middle class people who got royally screwed by the Obama contingent in 2008 have already left.  If all that remains are two clueless contingents with tunnel vision who think they are fighting for the same territory, than the party is in worse shape than I thought.  No amount of coalition building is going to help a party that leaves most of its base, and the vast majority of voters it needs to win, out of the negotiations.

The only thing the vast majority want to hear about in the next 18 months is what are the candidates going to do about unemployment. Anything else is a distraction.

Ted Rall:

The Evil of Two Lessers

The two-party system made simple:

Two worthless scoundrels are on the ballot.

If you vote for one of them, a worthless scoundrel will win.

If you don’t vote, a worthless scoundrel will win.

It’s a pretty unappealing sales pitch. How did it last 200 years?

Reuters:

Democrats sharpen attack on Medicare overhaul

Democrats sharpened their attack on Monday against a Republican plan to overhaul Medicare as they prepared to force their opponents to vote on the unpopular proposal to privatize the health program for the elderly.

Senate leader Harry Reid plans a vote this week on the Republican budget proposal, which would end traditional fee-for-service Medicare for future retirees and instead provide them with a voucher to purchase federally subsidized medical plans from private insurers…

Polls show the proposal is disliked, particularly among independents and the elderly whose support will be crucial to candidates in next year’s presidential and congressional elections. Democrats are eager to put Senate Republicans on the record on the proposal, which passed the Republican-controlled House of Representatives last month.

But will they stick with it when the GOP fights back?

Ben Smith:

GOP shapes Medicare response

Sen. Chuck Schumer vowed yesterday to make the Medicare changes in Paul Ryan’s budget a defining campaign issue for Senate Republicans in 2012 — but Republicans plan to respond by reviving criticism of cuts to the Medicare Advantage program that were built into the 2010 health care bill.

In the [a Congressional hearing], Sen. Blll Nelson laments the “unconscionable” cuts to the program.

“He and every other Senate Democrat went on to vote for it.” one Republican staffer emails. “We’d agree with Schumer that in races such as this Medicare will be a key issue.”

Republicans ran hard on the issue of Medicare cuts during the 2010 campaign — and it was part of the reason that senior citizens swung so hard towards GOP candidates.

The Democrats never did a good job of explaining to Americans that it was only one part of Medicare, one that should be completely done away with, that was being cut.

Greg Sargent:

[A]ttacking Dems from the left on Medicare … amounts to an admission that Dems are winning the argument over Ryancare. It’s an effort to muddy the waters by persuading the public that both parties agree on the need to cut Medicare and even change it in a fundamental way — and that the only argument is over the details.

Indeed, in another sign of the game plan in use here, the NRSC just circulated to reporters a poll taken by liberal groups showing that Senate Dems in swing states who agree to deep cuts in Medicare will be vulnerable. The NRSC’s argument is that Dems who voted for Medicare Advantage cuts last year will now be vulnerable to GOP attacks over those cuts if they make Medicare a central issue this year!

Mary at The Left Coaster:

An interesting thing happened while the deficit hawks were kibitzing about saving Medicare. Overall private healthcare costs are going up even while more people are deferring procedures, but Medicare costs are rising less than even the low inflation. From Angry Bear:

“costs for Medicare patients are being better contained than those covered under commercial insurance plans,” observes David M. Blitzer, chairman of the S&P Index Committee.

So where is that vaulted free market that is going to save Medicare from bankrupting the nation? And where people only get a chintzy voucher and when they need care, they can just go one-on-one with the medical-industrial system to figure out if they can pay for it?

Krugman:

Brad DeLong praises Jacob Weisberg for noticing, finally, that the GOP has gone off the deep end — then asks why Weisberg hasn’t written a piece about how he got snookered by Paul Ryan just 6 weeks ago.

And more important, what will happen when the next charlatan comes along?

John Quiggin is optimistic: he thinks that we may have reached a real turning point. I hope he’s right. But I doubt it. There’s a large cohort of people in the commentariat (and one in the White House, I fear) who are more or less liberal in sentiment, but desperately want to see themselves as men who transcend partisan differences; and to serve their self-image they keep looking for what Atrios calls “GOP daddies”, supposedly serious, sensible Republicans they can praise to show their open-mindedness.

So what happens when this intense desire to find sensible Republicans faces the reality of a GOP gone bonkers? The answer is a series of unrequited crushes. Paul Ryan is only the latest figure to be held up as an example of competence and reasonableness despite clear evidence, for anyone willing to see it, that he utterly lacked those qualities. Some of us remember that none other than George W. Bush once got the same treatment.

So my guess is that any day now someone else will get the nod. Actually, Mitch Daniels would have gotten the Ryan treatment if he had run — and down the road pundits would have been shocked, shocked to find that Bush’s budget director, who did as much as anyone to explode America’s debt, is not actually sensible or moderate. Now unrequited centrist love will have to find a new object for its affections — but whoever it is, we can confidently predict that he will disappoint those expectations.

Meet the new crank, same as the old cranks.

Joshua Holland, AlterNet:

Crazy, Unconstitutional Laws Right-Wingers Are Blowing Your Money On

They rode into power on a wave of conservative populism, vowing to rein in spending, slash deficits (remember how the Tea Partiers swore they weren’t focusing on those “wedge” social issues anymore?), and above all, restore our fealty to the Constitution, a document they claim to hold an almost religious reverence for.

Then, in a development as easy to predict as the sun rising in the east, they set themselves to passing outrageous legislation designed to appeal to their far-right base – much of it legislation that, on its face, is blatantly unconstitutional. And passing gimmicky, unconstitutional laws isn’t free – under federal law, states can be ordered to pay the fees of the lawyers who bring winning civil rights suits against them, so they usually end up picking up the tab for both sides of the litigation when they lose…

The costs of violating citizens’ rights can really add up. And yet, after promising to slash government spending, conservatives in a dozen state houses across the country are apparently willing to break the bank defending their fringe policies in court…

As I’ve argued in the past, conservatives have come to use the word “unconstitutional” to mean any policy they don’t like. One might argue that progressives have ceded that ground to them, but all of these issues speak to the beauty of that document, which places a hard limit on what ideologues can do when they get a little bit of power.

Of course, these are all pathetic exercises in “governance,” but, barring some very egregious judicial activism – not out of the question with this Supreme Court – these silly and dangerous laws will not stand.