I just read the following story on msn.co.uk:
"Virginia man loses nearly 80 pounds in 6 months by eating at McDonald's every day
A Virginia man lost about 80 pounds (36 kilograms) in six months by eating nearly every meal at McDonald's. Not Big Macs, french fries and chocolate shakes. Mostly salads, wraps and apple dippers without the caramel sauce. Chris Coleson tipped the scales at 278 pounds (126 kilograms) in December. The 5-foot-8 (1.7 meters) Coleson now weighs 199 pounds (90 kilograms) and his waist size has dropped from 50 inches (127 centimeters) to 36 inches (91 centimeters). The 42-year-old businessman from Quinton says he chose McDonald's because it's convenient.
Coleson says his goal is to get back to the 185 pounds (84 kilograms) he weighed when he married Tricia Summer ten years ago."
That, my friends, is some spectacular bullshit. It is a fact that McDonald's salads contain more fat than their burgers - all you need to do is check the nutritional information on their website. Which, because I apparently have nothing better to do with my time, I did.
A double cheeseburger contains 440 calories and 23 grams of fat. The exhaustively-named Premium Bacon Ranch Salad with Crispy Chicken contains (once you add the salad dressing, which their website doesn't as standard) 470 calories and 26 grams of fat. Even the healthiest salad combination contains 340 calories and 13 grams of fat, both of which are considerably higher than the standard hamburger (at 250 cals and 9g of fat). Admittedly, neither quite reach the levels of a Big Mac, which has 540 calories and 29g of fat (45% of your RDA). But I would hardly call it the cornerstone of a healthy diet, much less one which would facilitate losing 6kg a month for 6 consecutive months. And whilst I'm at it, their wraps are hardly a picture of nutritional value either.
Leaving that aside for a moment, what a strangely written article. Is this what passes for prose on the internet? Sentence fragments. And. A general lack of coherence. And why, exactly, should anyone care that his goal is to get back to the 185lbs he weighed when he married Tricia Summer (whoever the hell she is)?
I'm enjoying the post-Irish vote Lisbon Treaty squabbling taking place at the moment. At least in the Czech Republic we have one voice of sanity and common sense.
Songs for the Deaf: 'Feed the Animals' - Girl Talk (not as good as I'd hoped, but anything that samples Temple of the Dog's 'Hunger Strike' and Ace of Base in the same track is fine by me); 'One-Armed Scissor' - At The Drive-In; 'Tired of Sex' - Weezer
Quote of the Day: "The neon signs which hang over our cities and outshine the natural light of the night with their own are comets presaging the natural disaster of society, its frozen death. Yet they do not come from the sky. They are controlled from earth. It depends upon human beings themselves whether they will extinguish these lights and awake from a nightmare which only threatens to become actual as long as men believe it. - T. W. Adorno, 'The Schema of Mass Culture' (my goodness, what would he have made of all of this?)
Saturday, 21 June 2008
Saturday, 14 June 2008
The Origins of Totalitarian Democracy?
So, voters in the Republic of Ireland have voted against the Lisbon Treaty, rejecting it by a margin of 53.4% to 46.6% in yesterday's referendum. The Lisbon Treaty, let us remember, is itself a compromised and attenuated version of the European constitution which was so resoundingly rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005. The Treaty of Lisbon requires ratification by ALL 27 member states in order to become law. It would, as such, be natural to assume that the Treaty has been withdrawn - that bureaucrats, politicians, and lawyers have gone back to the drawing board (again); one might even hope for an acknowledgment that plans for a 'greater' or more integrated Europe are finished, an understanding that even the watered-down version has been rejected by the only EU nation whose citizens were allowed to vote on the Treaty.
But, then, of course, one remembers that this is the EU we are talking about, and that nothing so trifling as the democratic will of the people ought to derail the vision of a United States of Europe to rival that of the USA or China. Ireland, declared EU President Jose Manuel Barroso against all evidence to the contrary, remains "committed to a strong Europe." Now, let us not forget that this was the country which rejected the Treaty of Nice (effectively a referendum on joining the Euro) back in 2001 by a margin of 46.1% in favour and 53.9% against (it is worth noting, as an aside, that as yesterday's referendum demonstrates, the 'No' vote has actually increased in Ireland). What was the EU's reaction? They forced Ireland to vote again, the bill finally passing in October 2002.
There is, of course, precedence for this kind of disregard for democracy within the EU: when Danish voters rejected the Maastricht Treaty in 1992, they too were told to vote again, presumably until the 'correct' result came up. The fact that Maastricht was initially rejected by such a narrow margin (0.7%) is entirely irrelevant: firstly, voter turnout was extraordinarily high (83.1%) and, moreover, that is the way the democratic process works: on a simple 'yes-no' question, a win by one vote, by 0.1% of the vote, or by 100% of the vote is the same. That is the point of such a vote; the losers cannot turn around and proclaim that they 'almost won', or that they would have won had voters only understood the question adequately. There is no 'almost'; 'almost' is nothing. 'Almost' is defeat, defeat in a democratic vote undertaken by the citizens of a democracy.
Where does the EU go from here? Ah yes, "Ratifications should continue to take their course," stated Barroso. And what, in effect, does this mean? It means that in all of the other EU member-states - the ones in which voters do not get a say in proceedings - the Lisbon Treaty will be ratified. And then, with Ireland the only obstacle remaining, the EU will exert such immense pressure that, in the end, the inevitable re-vote will take place. But what happens if the Irish reject it again? What then? How many rejections is enough for the EU? One? Apparently not, even if it has come from four separate countries (France, Holland, Denmark, and - twice - Ireland). Two? Three? At what stage will the EU get the message - the clear, unambiguous, democratic, and legitimate message - that its citizens (although, of course, let us be clear: the EU itself has no 'citizens', at least not yet. This is precisely what is at stake here) do not want federalism, a common foreign policy, a united army. The EU's sheer contempt for the democratic process, for the will of the people, is breathtaking. The EU is like the stalker (the sex pest?) of Europe, unable to take 'no' for an answer.
The EU is a body whose co-legislative organ, The Council of the European Union, is entirely unaccountable, holding secret votes the results of which cannot be scrutinised by member-state parliaments. It is an organisation whose one deference to the democratic process - MEPs - are, likewise, unaccountable to member-state parliaments. The EU Commission is served by commissioners whose membership is proposed by member state governments and approved by the European Parliament, entirely bypassing any notion of accountability of democracy. It is, finally, an organisation whose central body, the Council of the European Union, has relative voting weights rather than outright democracy. 'One person, one vote' clearly means nothing to the EU.
For too long the opponents of the EU have been branded as nationalist, insular, parochial, ignorant, and racist. No doubt a very few of them are, but many, many more have been poorly served by fringe political parties who do more to de-legitimise their cause than to strengthen it. So-called 'Euro-skepticism' is a legitimate point of view. But the future of the EU is an issue which goes beyond simple left-right, Labour-Conservative dichotomies. Not only is the EU undemocratic, it is actively anti-democratic, not to mention bloated, incompetent, corrupt, self-serving, and wildly unpopular. Even those people who are in favour of the Lisbon Treaty, of the European constitution, of a federal Europe modeled after the USA, ought to be gravely concerned about the EU's democratic deficit. You cannot simply shrug your shoulders and tell the people that you know what is right for them. Europe has been down that road before.
But, then, of course, one remembers that this is the EU we are talking about, and that nothing so trifling as the democratic will of the people ought to derail the vision of a United States of Europe to rival that of the USA or China. Ireland, declared EU President Jose Manuel Barroso against all evidence to the contrary, remains "committed to a strong Europe." Now, let us not forget that this was the country which rejected the Treaty of Nice (effectively a referendum on joining the Euro) back in 2001 by a margin of 46.1% in favour and 53.9% against (it is worth noting, as an aside, that as yesterday's referendum demonstrates, the 'No' vote has actually increased in Ireland). What was the EU's reaction? They forced Ireland to vote again, the bill finally passing in October 2002.
There is, of course, precedence for this kind of disregard for democracy within the EU: when Danish voters rejected the Maastricht Treaty in 1992, they too were told to vote again, presumably until the 'correct' result came up. The fact that Maastricht was initially rejected by such a narrow margin (0.7%) is entirely irrelevant: firstly, voter turnout was extraordinarily high (83.1%) and, moreover, that is the way the democratic process works: on a simple 'yes-no' question, a win by one vote, by 0.1% of the vote, or by 100% of the vote is the same. That is the point of such a vote; the losers cannot turn around and proclaim that they 'almost won', or that they would have won had voters only understood the question adequately. There is no 'almost'; 'almost' is nothing. 'Almost' is defeat, defeat in a democratic vote undertaken by the citizens of a democracy.
Where does the EU go from here? Ah yes, "Ratifications should continue to take their course," stated Barroso. And what, in effect, does this mean? It means that in all of the other EU member-states - the ones in which voters do not get a say in proceedings - the Lisbon Treaty will be ratified. And then, with Ireland the only obstacle remaining, the EU will exert such immense pressure that, in the end, the inevitable re-vote will take place. But what happens if the Irish reject it again? What then? How many rejections is enough for the EU? One? Apparently not, even if it has come from four separate countries (France, Holland, Denmark, and - twice - Ireland). Two? Three? At what stage will the EU get the message - the clear, unambiguous, democratic, and legitimate message - that its citizens (although, of course, let us be clear: the EU itself has no 'citizens', at least not yet. This is precisely what is at stake here) do not want federalism, a common foreign policy, a united army. The EU's sheer contempt for the democratic process, for the will of the people, is breathtaking. The EU is like the stalker (the sex pest?) of Europe, unable to take 'no' for an answer.
The EU is a body whose co-legislative organ, The Council of the European Union, is entirely unaccountable, holding secret votes the results of which cannot be scrutinised by member-state parliaments. It is an organisation whose one deference to the democratic process - MEPs - are, likewise, unaccountable to member-state parliaments. The EU Commission is served by commissioners whose membership is proposed by member state governments and approved by the European Parliament, entirely bypassing any notion of accountability of democracy. It is, finally, an organisation whose central body, the Council of the European Union, has relative voting weights rather than outright democracy. 'One person, one vote' clearly means nothing to the EU.
For too long the opponents of the EU have been branded as nationalist, insular, parochial, ignorant, and racist. No doubt a very few of them are, but many, many more have been poorly served by fringe political parties who do more to de-legitimise their cause than to strengthen it. So-called 'Euro-skepticism' is a legitimate point of view. But the future of the EU is an issue which goes beyond simple left-right, Labour-Conservative dichotomies. Not only is the EU undemocratic, it is actively anti-democratic, not to mention bloated, incompetent, corrupt, self-serving, and wildly unpopular. Even those people who are in favour of the Lisbon Treaty, of the European constitution, of a federal Europe modeled after the USA, ought to be gravely concerned about the EU's democratic deficit. You cannot simply shrug your shoulders and tell the people that you know what is right for them. Europe has been down that road before.
Friday, 6 June 2008
Ouch
According to theweatherchannel.com, the 'Feels Like' temperature at 3 and 4pm tomorrow will be exactly 100F.
By the way, expect that as the Summer goes on, my posts will become more and more weather-obsessed.
By the way, expect that as the Summer goes on, my posts will become more and more weather-obsessed.
Walking in the Sun...
I am a man living in fear: the weather forecast predicts that tomorrow will be a cloudy 96F. Cloudy = humid. 96F = atrociously hot. Will my English constitution survive? Luckily, I'm supposed to be spending most of tomorrow in Brooklyn, where it will, hopefully, be mildly less appalling. But I fear that I might simply melt in the sun - I guess I'll just have to shelter in the shade of the trees. Tomorrow morning, before all of that, I'm going to check out the open air book fair at one of my favourite NY bookstores, Housing Works, and then head over the Brooklyn Bridge to try to speak with/see my parents and sister on that big HG Wells-esque New York-London video pipe thing. If you don't know what I'm talking about, you're missing out. Hopefully I won't have dissolved into a puddle by then.
Tomorrow calls for the deployment of drastic, terrible measures: sandles or, as they prefer to call them over here 'flip-flops'. Truly, I have sunk as low as one can possibly go.
On the plus side, England's cricket team are currently murdering New Zealand. And I'm about to see Toby! Huzzah!
Songs for the Deaf: 'You' - Atmosphere; KROQ LA (in general); KEXP Seattle (ditto): I've discovered the iTunes radio function, and it is a thing of wonder.
Quote of the Day: "I'm melting, MELTING, oh what a world!!!" - The Wicked Witch of the West, Wizard of Oz.
Tomorrow calls for the deployment of drastic, terrible measures: sandles or, as they prefer to call them over here 'flip-flops'. Truly, I have sunk as low as one can possibly go.
On the plus side, England's cricket team are currently murdering New Zealand. And I'm about to see Toby! Huzzah!
Songs for the Deaf: 'You' - Atmosphere; KROQ LA (in general); KEXP Seattle (ditto): I've discovered the iTunes radio function, and it is a thing of wonder.
Quote of the Day: "I'm melting, MELTING, oh what a world!!!" - The Wicked Witch of the West, Wizard of Oz.
Sunday, 1 June 2008
Pulchritudo et Salubritas
I see that my hometown has been in the news today:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/7430008.stm
I remember a time when my sister and I derisively nicknamed Bournemouth 'BOB' (Boring Old Bournemouth - we were about 12 at the time) - now its all corpses in suitcases, drug-dealing gangsters (sorry Mr Carr, "legitimate businessmen"), and dead students. Still, some things never change:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bournemouth_School
Good to see that Mr Granger is still at the helm, slowly steering a once-fine school into the abyss.
And whilst I'm running down my homeland, this story didn't exactly fill me with patriotic pride:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7429638.stm
The choicest line? "It's sweaty on there but I'm going round and round until I vomit" - well said Mr Peter Moore from Brighton. Still, all of this is perhaps understandable: the Circle Line is liable to reduce even the most saintly of souls to violence and vandalism, even without the presence of alcohol.
I'll leave with some words from that ardent and spare chronicler of the decline of modern England, Philip Larkin:
'Nothing To Be Said'
For nations vague as weed,
For nomads among stones,
Small-statured cross-faced tribes
And cobble-close families
In mill-towns on dark mornings
Life is slow dying.
So are their separate ways
Of building, benediction,
Measuring love and money
Ways of slow dying.
The days spent hunting pig
Or holding a garden-party,
Hours giving evidence
Or birth, advance
On death equally slowly.
And saying so to some
Means nothing; others it leaves
Nothing to be said.
From 'The Whitsun Weddings'
There we were aimed. And as we raced across
Brights knots of rail
Past standing Pullmans, walls of blackened moss
Came close, and it was nearly done, this frail
Travelling coincidence; and what it held
Stood ready to be loosed with all the power
That being changed can give. We slowed again,
And as the tightened brakes took hold, there swelled
A sense of falling, like an arrow-shower
Sent out of sight, somewhere becoming rain.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/7430008.stm
I remember a time when my sister and I derisively nicknamed Bournemouth 'BOB' (Boring Old Bournemouth - we were about 12 at the time) - now its all corpses in suitcases, drug-dealing gangsters (sorry Mr Carr, "legitimate businessmen"), and dead students. Still, some things never change:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bournemouth_School
Good to see that Mr Granger is still at the helm, slowly steering a once-fine school into the abyss.
And whilst I'm running down my homeland, this story didn't exactly fill me with patriotic pride:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7429638.stm
The choicest line? "It's sweaty on there but I'm going round and round until I vomit" - well said Mr Peter Moore from Brighton. Still, all of this is perhaps understandable: the Circle Line is liable to reduce even the most saintly of souls to violence and vandalism, even without the presence of alcohol.
I'll leave with some words from that ardent and spare chronicler of the decline of modern England, Philip Larkin:
'Nothing To Be Said'
For nations vague as weed,
For nomads among stones,
Small-statured cross-faced tribes
And cobble-close families
In mill-towns on dark mornings
Life is slow dying.
So are their separate ways
Of building, benediction,
Measuring love and money
Ways of slow dying.
The days spent hunting pig
Or holding a garden-party,
Hours giving evidence
Or birth, advance
On death equally slowly.
And saying so to some
Means nothing; others it leaves
Nothing to be said.
From 'The Whitsun Weddings'
There we were aimed. And as we raced across
Brights knots of rail
Past standing Pullmans, walls of blackened moss
Came close, and it was nearly done, this frail
Travelling coincidence; and what it held
Stood ready to be loosed with all the power
That being changed can give. We slowed again,
And as the tightened brakes took hold, there swelled
A sense of falling, like an arrow-shower
Sent out of sight, somewhere becoming rain.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
