Beware "The Calorie Police!"' At least, that's how some look at the newly proposed Federal legislation which would require chain restaurants with 20 or more establishments to post the calories of everything they serve, right on the menu.' The National Restaurant Association, which originally fought calorie posting, now says it supports it.Dr. Lynn Silver, Assistant Commissioner, Bureau of Chronic Disease Prevention & Control at New York City's Department of Health and Mental Hygiene says "We hope this law will have a significant impact on both the frequency of obesity and diabetes in our city [which already has the law, by the way].' We estimate that in our city there will be 150,000 fewer people obese because of this." Well, I don't know if that's true, since every time I go out to eat, I see relatively fit people eating fish and vegetables and fat people eating lasagna with extra cheese.I've only encountered the calorie menu one time so far, and it was in New York.' There were dishes I thought were healthy, but I was totally wrong about them.' I definitely ordered my meals completely based on calorie content, leaving out foods I knew were yummy but which were calorie-laden.' Nonetheless, I was shocked to see how many relatively innocent-looking dishes had enough calories for the entire day and the next morning too.I know people who have worked in a number of restaurants, and they tell me that to make food "delicious," extra sugar, fat and salt are added by the bucketful.' Butter, butter, and more butter; sugar to make the food sweeter, and salt to give more flavor.' This is especially true when the meat, poultry or fish is not of the highest quality or if it's a bit old.I've gotten to the point that no matter what I order (even fish), I ask for whatever sauce they are serving to be put on the side.' I never have salad with dressing - again, I order any dressing on the side.' If I use any sauce or dressing at all, it's a micro drizzle for a little taste.'Do I think this will diminish obesity?' No.' I do think, however, that it will help people with self discipline as well as the motivation to be healthy to make the right choices and not be undermined right under their noses.' I think that, generally, folks with limited motivation and self-discipline will ignore or rationalize the calorie facts and add unwanted pressure to our health system, where the health-conscious have to financially support the health- un conscious behavior of others.'I do believe that the calorie count posting laws might serve to have restaurants cut fewer corners when it comes to the quality of their cooking and their menu planning.' And that I am looking forward to! More >>

More >>

The most important part of having "rights" is taking "responsibility" for those rights.' This is a concept many activist groups don't "get," as evidenced by their angry utterances and actions.' For these people (feminists, for example), their actions are irrelevant - they believe they should be able to say and do whatever they please.' It's the other people who have to toe the line.Here's an example:' colleges in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh said that female students would be banned from wearing jeans and other "western" clothes in order to halt sexual harassment by male classmates. "Girls who choose to wear jeans will be expelled from the college," Meeta Jamal, principal of the Dayanand girls' college in Kanpur city told Agence France-Presse (AFP). "This will be the only way to stop crime against women." Okay - so, jeans, shorts, tight blouses and mini-skirts on campus are being banned in a growing number of their colleges in an attempt to crack down on "EVE-teasing" (as sexual harassment is known in India).' But, of course, these "oh so mature" and wise girls between the ages of 17 and 20 say that these rules punish innocent females rather than tackling the men who talk "smack" to them..Let's look at this in a very pragmatic way.' Two girls are walking down the street, passing a group of young men.' Each girl is on the opposite side of the street.' One girl has on a tight-cropped top and low-cut jeans.' The girl on the other side of the street is wearing a pretty, but modest, dress.' Which side of the street are the guys going to pay attention to?' Which girl are they going to approach?' Which girl are they going to "tease" to see if they can "hook up?"' The answer is easy.Which girl is showing off her "wares?"' Which girl is acting in a provocative manner?' Which girl is using clothing and body language to possibly advertise her, ahem, "social" availability?' Which girl looks as though sex is on her mind?' The answer is easy.It is completely unreasonable for a provocatively-dressed woman to get any when guys hoot and whistle.' If clothing is just another form of "self-expression," well, we all know what sexy clothes are expressing.' Modest clothes are expressing nothing close to a "come-hither" attitude.A female at work has her boobs popping out of her top and a fellow worker says "nice boobs."' He's considered "bad," but she isn't?' Isn't foisting your sexuality on someone else harassment?' Women can provoke men, but men can't react?' That is the silly thinking of most feminists.Young men in a classroom can't pay attention to the blackboard and the teacher's words when he has in front of him the sight of a girl's lower back and upper butt, because she's wearing very low cut jeans.' Young men on a campus can't even remember which building to go into when a young woman walks by with her soft belly jutting out beneath her short top over her low-cut jeans.This is where responsibility comes in.' If you don't want that kind of attention, don't invite it! When I read the many of the comments posted in response to this story on Breitbart.com , I was not surprised at the naive and utterly stupid remarks about women having their rights to dress and behave any way they want (i.e., no responsibility), and men should control their verbal and emotional reactions (i.e., responsibility all on the men).And then I got to this comment...a nugget of gold in the compost heap: When I entered high school, it was the first year when girls were allowed to wear pants.' Since then, of course, clothing standards have dropped to the point where girls are wearing next to nothing on top of low-cut, tight jeans, or short-shorts. In high school, I would have screamed my head off that it was unfair to tell us what to wear.' Now that we've had 30 years of half-dressed high fashion, and I've become older and wiser, I understand why modesty makes sense.' Our schools, especially here in California, are a complete disaster.' There are many reasons for it, but requiring that girls dress modestly and that boys dress respectfully is a good start.' Considering that hormones are bubbling like volcanoes, particularly in teenage boys, simple steps like this would make a difference.' I remember the days when people dressed up nicely just to go to the movies!' I'm not advocating this, but I would even be for school kids wearing uniforms.' It puts them in a different frame of mind.' Trying to get kids to sit still, pay attention and get an education is not only difficult, but as we see from our dismal failure in the last 20 to 30 years, is imperative for the future of this country.' Looking back, it does amaze me how much my opinion has changed.' It is said that the devil is in the details, and I must concur.' The small things that I thought didn't matter at all turn out to be very important, not only in and of themselves, but they are the blocks on which other decisions/behavior are built.' It's really hard to see this when you're 15 or even 25, but as have accumulated experience in life, it has become very clear. More >>

More >>

More >>

As I was walking through my kitchen to my office, my husband was having his morning cereal, watching Fox News.' They were in the midst of a perky promo for 'what's coming up next,' concerning a school district that was using financial rewards to motivate students to get good grades.' I kept walking... and only heard one bit more about the subject:' 'It's working.'That promo stuck in my mind because of those last words:' 'It's working.''If tantalizing children with money, money, money actually makes them get good grades, because they pay more attention in class, put more effort into their homework, are more invested in studying for exams and working on reports and projects, well, that means that a lot of kids aren't living up to their potential.Why would MONEY make the difference, and not the appreciation of their parents, the respect of their peers, the approval from their teachers, or the mere burst of pride in doing well?' The answer is simple:' kids these days are not raised to care about appreciation, respect, approval and pride...period!' They are brought up to care about celebrity, extravagance, notoriety, freakish attention (think reality shows), infamy as a positive experience, and extreme non-conformity to traditional values.What happens to these kids when the money isn't there, but there is still the expectation of profound effort and commitment?' Certainly teachers, police, firefighters, those in the military, and small shop owners (to name just a few) aren't putting out their best efforts for the financial reward.' A police officer who 'collars' a serious bad guy gets a lot of thumps on the back, a night of some beers with fellow colleagues, and a notch toward an eventual promotion in rank.' Mostly, he has pride in doing his job well.'These children are not being moved in that direction at all by this 'money reward for grades' idea (except, maybe, for the beer).Schools have been eliminating accolades such as high honors at graduation (e.g., valedictorian) so as not to hurt the self-esteem of those who won't or can't rise to that occasion.' Yet, they want to give money, money, money to those who do.' What is THAT message?' No one's feelings are going to be hurt because they didn't get the money, money, money.' Ugh.I think we should go back to showing respect for the children who do perform well: for example, point systems that offer monthly 'perks' like not having to take a few quizzes because their grades are above a B+, or earning a class trip to the zoo, aquarium, or museum or something else that acknowledges their efforts without minimizing the meaning by throwing coins at them. More >>

More >>

More >>

Why the heck do we need role models?' Can't everyone just think for him or herself and make decisions about right and wrong and choices of action without somebody on a philosophical runway modeling what they could or should be?Possibly...but role models alert us to POSSIBILITIES, in addition to serving as INSPIRATION.Angry rappers role model distrust, rage, anti-social notions and actions: killing, raping, hating.Stupid "stars" role model self-indulgence and excess, self-importance: self self'' selfSuccessful people who "pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps" role model perseverance, giving up a "victim mentality," optimism and plain hard work.Heroic types (military, police, firemen, and caring bystanders) who put themselves on the line of life and death role model taking care of others.'and so it goes.These days, however, good role models are few and far between.' Pastor Bill Shuler, of Capital Life Church in Arlington Virginia, pointed the way in his recent essay: 10 Reasons Why we Are Losing Good Role Models.What follows is my paraphrasing of his list:1. Honorable people are attacked for taking a stand for morality and values The favorite attack here usually takes the form of being called either a "hater" or a "hypocrite." If a person disagrees with you, you can say that they simply hate you or your stand, or that they once (usually decades ago) behaved contrary to their own words so therefore, they have no moral ground on which to defend their position.' I don't have to explain how ugly, stupid, and dangerous those approaches are to the well being of a civilized society.'2. High profile scandals in sports politics and religion have caused us to become jaded. Yup - it's hard to believe that a moral high ground even exists if the people you looked up to don't respect what they have and the responsibility it gives them.3. Fewer dads are present in the home. Soon, most children won't come from intact homes where they see a dad providing and protecting and teaching them how to be decent men and women.'4. Success has been defined as fame, fortune, and power. We used to have the word "infamous" to describe people well known for skuzzy behaviors...now it's all just "famous."' "Octo-mom" Nadya Suleman now has a television show because she's famous for showing incredible insensitivity and irresponsibility in having 16 children with no dad or intact married family.''' If someone is rich (no matter how they got there), they have admirers.'5. Image often supersedes character. Bad boys and bad girls reign supreme in our media-drenched culture.' The more stupid and horrid their behavior, the more important they are to the media.'6. Indulgence replaces sacrifice. Just think daycare.7. The practice of self-discipline is losing ground. If you "feel it" you have license to "do it" is today's mantra.' Consideration of consequences to others, as well as one's own future, became secondary.'8. Seeking of "self," on the other hand, is an over-practiced art." If I hear one more person excuse stupid, cruel, or self-indulgent behavior on the basis of "low self-esteem" or "I guess I have to learn to love MYSELF," I think I'll scream.'9. Family values have become a political issue rather than an ideal to be embraced. The responsibility and obligation to spouse and children outweighs feelings and urges, which are temporary and often foolhardy.10. Good people with deep convictions remain silent when they should speak up. I have said it quite differently:' way too often, good people are "wusses;" they are afraid to stand up (not without good reason...see #1), because they want to be liked. I have gotten myself into all sorts of trouble by "standing up," so I know what it takes. "Being beautiful, uninhibited or rich has become a cheap substitute for courage, decency and selflessness," writes the Pastor.' And he is so very correct. That's why I often ask people to project themselves 20 years into the future, and then look back on themselves at this very moment.' I ask them to tell me what they would need to do in order to be proud of themselves.' It's funny how they always know what's right when looked at from that perspective. More >>

I can't believe how many emails I got from those of you who watch that program, Jon & Kate Plus 8 .' It's a reality TV show, and they're breaking up because he had an affair?' Because she seems to be really mean to him, people have written suggesting I get involved.' NO WAY.'When I was young, there was a show on PBS, An American Family , that was the same sort of thing.' Cameras were there 24 hours a day, and the family fell apart.' Strangers were there, the family was performing for television, and there were stresses and strains with the celebrity part of it - there shouldn't even be a celebrity part.' I just think these things are disgusting displays.Then there was the Jim Carrey movie, The Truman Show , which was about his life being a television show, and he not knowing it.' I remember at the time that people said, "Isn't this a disgusting thing to do to a person?"' Well, now, people volunteer for it!' So, I have no respect for these parents.' I have no respect for any of the people who do this "reality" stuff.'My heart goes out to the kids.' Is it humane to children to let their parents exploit them in a television program when their images and intimacies are exposed to everyone for all time when they have no say or control?' Is it in the children's best interests to be USED as entertainment by two parents so self-absorbed that they put money and celebrity in front of their children's privacy?' It's like putting your children in a circus freak show strip and having a barker yelling: "Come in, come in and see what happens to children when their parents use them for your entertainment... It's exciting, it's damaging, but you won't be able to take your eyes off 'em.' Watch 'em wiggle. Watch 'em cry. Watch 'em squirm.' It's so much fun...bring popcorn and beer and come watch the show." To me, there should be a law that you can't use kids on TV like this.' It's one thing when they're acting, but it's another thing when they're being exploited.' I'm surprised that nobody stepped in and said "This is the exploitation of minor children," although late last week the Pennsylvania Department of Labor said it was looking into whether the show is complying with the state's child labor law.' But I'm not going to get involved.' There are other show-biz types who have a habit of doing that.' I'm not one of them.Here's one of the letters that came into me, and seemed to have the most in-depth information: I was once a fan of Jon & Kate Plus 8.' I loved watching these children, and seeing them grow. [note: I think it's exploitation]. Only the longer I watched the show, the more disturbed I became with Kate's treatment of her husband.' I'd turn off the TV feeling deflated rather than uplifted. Episode after episode, she'd berate and belittle him:' about his weight, his intelligence, and his parenting.' He'd take responsibility for his mistakes, while she'd excuse hers.' I remember one specific episode where he'd taken the day off to help her at home.' Having noticed one of the kids acting up, he put them in a "timeout."' She went over and said "Daddy's being mean," and let them go back and play.' It broke my heart to see his authority continuously undermined in front of his own children. Recently, at the end of their last season, Jon mentioned he wasn't up for another season, explaining how he hates how he can't go out in public and 'just be Jon.'' Instead, he's 'Jon & Kate Plus 8.'' Translation:' he's the guy on TV who is whipped by his self-centered wife. Weeks later, all of the scandal broke.' Kate, in a People Magazine interview, said that Jon felt cancelling the show would make him happy, but she didn't think anything would, so she would do what she felt was right for her family.' What is right for her family is not a television show, but two parents who love each other. He wanted to cancel the show so the world would no longer see his dirty laundry, his controlling wife, and constant failures.' It may not make him happy, but it would make his life bearable.' What would make him happy is having a wife who cares for him.' I just wish that someone would reach out to that woman and give her a hard shake, before she damages the lives of 8 little ones, and her husband.' It seems silly to be caught up in the lives of ten reality show strangers, but I've learned a little something from it.' I gained a better understanding of the Dr. Laura saying:' "Do you want this woman/man to be the mother/father of your 87 children?' Thanks for being a version of reality that I can rely on. I like that last sentence.' What do we call "entertainment?"' The shows where they have people competing to cook, make clothes, and all that other stuff are such mean shows.' Hostility?' Competitive venom?' I can't understand why we call this "entertainment."' The population that enjoys sitting there with popcorn and a beer, watching people be mean, be diminished, and be demoralized is scaring me. More >>