Moderate drinkers live longer than teatotallers

I can't believe I'm going to have to drink more to be healthy, since I really don't drink much at all. This on the heels of finding out that low-fat milk is bad for you (well, it increases the risk of some future cancers being malignant). Anyone else find this all just terribly confusing? Read More......

Credit card debt shot up in November

Because of the credit crunch and housing crash, fewer Americans are able to take home equity loans so they have been reaching for their credit cards. We've already heard about the need for many to use credit this winter to cover heating expenses, so the November jump is a very bad start to the season. At this point, it's still difficult to say if the cards are being used to live above their income or just to cover (increasing) expenses, such as gas, electricity and food.

Banks are much less forgiving these days with delays in credit card payments, taking a much harder line against even slightly late payments. This may have something to do with talk in Congress about cracking down on the credit card industry, but either way, this is not the time that anyone wants to be adding personal debt, if they can avoid it. Read More......

Processed foods contain more fat, salt and sugar than advertised

The story is from the UK though some of the mislabeled goods are available in the US, such as Kellogg's All Bran. It's difficult to say if the same shady labeling exists in the US though considering the lax oversight of food in the US, similar results would not be surprising. The problem here is that consumers purchase food, often healthy looking food, only to discover (or not) that it's anything but healthy. Can you imagine eating Kellogg's All Bran and later finding out they have more salt than a pack of potato chips? That's disgusting.

The processed food industry is always looking for new ways to implant new tastes on foods, courtesy of the chemical research industry. They are also searching for new methods of making food last on the shelf for decades. It's great for them but for consumers, these new fangled processing methods offer no positives, only negatives. For working families, finding time to prepare meals with real food using raw ingredients is never easy so they often rely on ready made products. Lifting up the hood of this industry is a start, but as humans, we need better (and honest) options for human food. Selling pretty packages of salt, sugar and chemical concoctions has to be taking a toll on the health of the nation. That too is a cost that needs to be considered as we review our health care system. Read More......

Six U.S. soldiers killed in bombing at booby-trapped house in Iraq

It's still brutal in Iraq. U.S. soldiers are still dying -- and there's still no end in sight:

Six U.S. soldiers were killed on Wednesday when a house rigged with explosives blew up north of Baghdad during a new U.S.-Iraqi offensive targeting al Qaeda guerrillas in Iraq, the U.S. military said.

It was one of the highest daily death tolls for U.S. troops in Iraq for months and followed the deaths of three soldiers in the operation a day earlier. More than 3,900 U.S. soldiers have been killed in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

Read More......

Just when you think Fox News can't sink any lower, they do. Facts just don't matter at Fox.

This is really amazing.

Yesterday, Major Garrett from Fox News ran with the rumor that Paul Begala was joining the Clinton campaign -- and despite repeated, personal denials from Paul Begala, Garrett kept reporting the story. This says everything you need to know about reporting at Fox News. Definitely check out Begala's post about this over at Huffington. It's illuminating to say the least. Begala actually includes the e-mails he sent to Garrett -- and Garrett's responses. Jacki Schechner, in a post at her blog titled "Major Disfunction", had this to say about Begala, with whom she used to work:

I know Paul. I like Paul. A lot. He's a solid guy.

When he recounts this saga, I trust this is exactly how it went down.

I don't really know Paul, but I know and trust Jacki. Read More......

Obama campaign chair questions Hillary's tears, why she didn't cry during Katrina

Jesse Jackson Jr, a co-chair of the Obama campaign, go on TV today and questioned whey Hillary teared up over her campaign hardships but didn't tear up over Hurricane Katrina. Here's the clip, via TPM Election Central.


I don't really fault Obama for taking on "the tears," but I do fault him for how he did it (a bit clumsy, I'd say). Then again, I don't think I'm the target audience for this ploy, and with that in mind, it may be downright brilliant. The rest of my analysis after the jump...

I mean, I get the overall point - that this is a woman who only tears up when she's in political trouble, rather than about puppy dogs and sunsets. And that's an interesting line of attack to try to diminish the now-famous tears. First off, this is a clear signal that some in the Obama camp think "the tear" may have caused their defeat in NH and are now trying to tear the tear apart before it hurts them elsewhere on the campaign. What matters is what the tear represents - a Hillary that is no longer just robotic Stepford borg Hillary Clinton. Now she's Hillary with a heart. So, her opponents must show that she's not Hillary with a heart because she didn't have a heart during Katrina, etc. Except that I don't recall Hillary being a problem during Katrina - the heartless one was Bush.

I think the Obama campaign flubbed this one. Not by attacking Hillary over the tear - if they perceive the tear as public enemy number one, then they have to undermine it somehow. And let's face it, it's not like the Clinton campaign has been playing nice with Obama. But I'm not sure the messenger for such an attack should be someone co-chairing Obama's campaign (this is what surrogates outside of the campaign are for, it's called plausible deniability), nor should his name contain the words Jesse or Jackson in them. Then again, choosing a black messenger to deliver the message that Hillary didn't care about Katrina (aka Hillary doesn't care about black folk) may be just the subliminal message the Obamaites want for the upcoming South Carolina primary, where half the Democratic primary voters are black. Read More......

Wear orange on Friday January 11 to protest Gitmo

The ACLU is organizing a nationwide protest this Friday, January 11, to protest the ongoing shame that is Guantanamo Bay. It's a rather innovative idea, wearing orange that day (though I'm not sure I own any orange, I'm a winter). Seriously, it's a novel idea for a protest and a worthy cause. Find out more via the ACLU's Web site here. Read More......

What worked for Hillary

From the NYT:

Mrs. Clinton solidified her position with Democrats, while Mr. Obama enjoyed support from independent voters, as he did in Iowa. But many of the states where the Democrats are heading allow only Democrats to vote in their party’s primary.

In New Hampshire, more voters viewed her as qualified to be commander in chief than said Mr. Obama was ready for that role, suggesting that Mrs. Clinton’s argument that she was more experienced to lead might have had traction here.

Most strikingly for Mrs. Clinton, women in New Hampshire did what they did not do in Iowa: rally behind her. Women supported her by 47 percent to 34 percent, according to a survey of voters leaving the polls; women voters in Iowa had been evenly divided between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama.

NV and SC pose a challenge for Hillary:

The next two contests for Democrats — the Nevada caucuses and the South Carolina primary — are being fought on challenging terrain for Mrs. Clinton. In Nevada, the powerful union of culinary workers is expected to put its muscle behind Mr. Obama. The South Carolina electorate is expected to be about 50 percent African-American, a group that has supported both Clintons but that Mr. Obama is competing fiercely to win.

Read More......

Did ballot changes in NH give Hillary 3% points more?

A Stanford professor says changes in the way New Hampshire printed their ballots may have given Hillary 3% more of the vote and that this explains why the results were so unexpected yesterday. I do have to say that I'm getting really tired of reading about how screwed up our elections are. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to read this article and see that the guy could very well have a point - why not just randomize everything? Read More......

Bankruptcies nearly doubled in Orlando area

Passing through the Orlando airport, the headline of the Orlando Sentinel caught my eye "Personal bankruptcies jump 96% in Metro Orlando." That's almost double. The economy of Florida is clearly tanking. And, they've got two Bushes to thank, George and Jeb. We'll see if Floridians stick with Republicans again this year after all the economic damage wrought. And, they can thank Bush and the GOPers for the new bankruptcy law that screws people while enriching the industries that brought about the fiscal crisis. More after the break.

The economic downturn seems to be affecting a wide swath Floridians -- across the economic spectrum:

Amid the growing mortgage-debt crisis, personal bankruptcies nearly doubled in Metro Orlando last year, although they remained far lower than the record levels earlier this decade, according to court figures released this week.

Nearly 7,060 debtors declared insolvency in Orlando's federal bankruptcy court in 2007, up 96 percent from 2006, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida reported.

Fueled by the mortgage crisis, personal bankruptcy is reaching all levels of the income spectrum -- from affluent professionals to lower-income subprime borrowers, bankruptcy lawyers said.

Read More......

Sexism and Hillary's tear

I've heard from a number of women, and read stories from a number of women, who find sexist the media (and public's?) reaction to Hillary's tearing up the other day. One example of such outrage was over this comment from John Edwards:

"Edwards, speaking at a press availability in Laconia, New Hampshire, offered little sympathy and pounced on the opportunity to bring into question Clinton's ability to endure the stresses of the presidency. Edwards responded, 'I think what we need in a commander-in-chief is strength and resolve, and presidential campaigns are tough business, but being president of the United States is also tough business.'"

Clearly, Edwards is hitting Hillary back for challenging Obama's readiness for office. But some felt that this was sexist of Edwards: "Today he deployed against Hillary the oldest, dumbest canard about women: they're too emotional to hold power." Which gets into some interesting questions, after the jump...

Are women, on average, the same as men? Emotionally? Psychologically? In the way they approach problems and solutions? In the way they handle human relationships? When it comes to showing emotion? Is the charge "sexism" because someone is saying there is a difference between men and women or because someone is saying that the supposed difference makes women less qualified to be president, or both? (What if a female candidate were to say that the differences between the sexes make women MORE qualified than men - or at least her status as a woman makes her uniquely qualified - would that be sexist too?) Now take the word "woman" out of it altogether. Is it wrong for a candidate to say that their opponent is emotional, empathetic, and strives to settle differences peacefully, and that those aren't qualities we need in a commander in chief during wartime? Is it okay to make those charges if you leave the word "woman" out of it? Then again, Edwards did leave the word woman out of it, but since his target was a woman, you could argue that it was implied. So is it okay to make those charges against a man who is emotional, empathetic and all the rest? Or is that sexist too, or even homophobic?

I'm not sure. Discrimination is a nuanced affair. You can make the same comment about a white man and a black man, or about a straight guy and a gay guy, and what was a funny joke suddenly becomes racist or homophobic. Why? Because historical context matters when discussing prejudice. It's not that offensive to make fun of someone for being left-handed, but to suggest they're limp-wristed is a no-no. Sure, both are simply benign physical attributes, but one is historically charged, in the same way that the degradation of women is historically charged. Is that why it's wrong to comment on a woman being emotional? The same way it might be offensive, in some contexts, to suggest that a gay man is more sensitive?

I really don't know. As someone who isn't a member of the group in question (be it gay, black, woman, etc.) it's often difficult, if not impossible, to recognize more nuanced bigotry against that group - you have to have lived with it for a lifetime to recognize the more subtle stuff. But having said that, every group has its members who just aren't happy unless they can spot the daily bigot who's holding them down. And if they can't spot him, they'll create him. Read More......

Goldman Sachs says we're in a recession

Henry Paulson's old company, Goldman Sachs is yet another high profile, highly successful business that sees a US recession.

"Over the past few months, we have become increasingly concerned that the US housing and credit market downturn would trigger not just a growth slowdown and substantial Fed easing -- our long-standing view -- but also an outright recession," Goldman Sachs said in a note to clients Wednesday. "The latest data suggest that recession has now arrived, or will very shortly."

The recent rise in unemployment is particularly worrisome, Goldman indicated.

Read More......

Hillary front page news everywhere

The Guardian, The Independent, Le Figaro, Frankfurter Allgemeine, El Pais and more. It's going to be fun to see how everyone reacts to that impressive display yesterday. Read More......

Wednesday Morning Open Thread

Wow. That was some night -- on both sides.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, those New Hampshire voters are fickle -- and turn on a dime.

Be interesting to see the analysis of how Clinton pulled it out. How were the tracking polls so wrong? You have to wonder. Sure makes the next couple weeks way more interesting.

And, how about the repudiation of Romney? Don't forget, those NH voters really, really know Romney. He was the governor of the next door state -- and he has a big summer place in NH. The voters in NH knew Mitt well enough to reject him -- soundly. How long before the GOPers turn on McCain?

This is an extra early open thread...I'm getting on a plane shortly. Read More......

NSA report confirms Gulf of Tonkin incident never happened

Who needs to study history any way? What could we possibly learn about people lying to drag a country into war? Then again, if you were drunk or blowing coke at the time, you might not have remembered any of it anyway.

The author of the report "demonstrates that not only is it not true, as (then US) secretary of defense Robert McNamara told Congress, that the evidence of an attack was 'unimpeachable,' but that to the contrary, a review of the classified signals intelligence proves that 'no attack happened that night,'" FAS said in a statement.

"What this study demonstrated is that the available intelligence shows that there was no attack. It's a dramatic reversal of the historical record," Aftergood said.

Read More......

US health care system ranks last, France #1, again

The GOP and right wing media lapdogs always cherry pick data about something that failed in a national health system and use that as the excuse for propping up the dysfunctional and costly system that exists in the US. They always fail to recognize the WHO ranking that puts France at the top (Freedom Health, perhaps?) and the US arriving at number 37, just behind global heavyweights Dominica and Costa Rica. Here's another study that they will all want to ignore. Every life is precious, if you can afford health care, might be their new line. At least the US didn't have to compete with Costa Rica this time. Whew!

France, Japan and Australia rated best and the United States worst in new rankings focusing on preventable deaths due to treatable conditions in 19 leading industrialized nations, researchers said on Tuesday.

If the U.S. health care system performed as well as those of those top three countries, there would be 101,000 fewer deaths in the United States per year, according to researchers writing in the journal Health Affairs.

Read More......