Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

September 20, 2007
By: Kevin Drum

REVISING AND EXTENDING....Last week Arnold told California Republicans that the GOP was "dying at the box office." On Wednesday he explained what he really meant:

If I see you gaining weight and gaining weight and gaining weight, I would eventually — if I cared at all about you — I would say: "You know something? If you continue this way, you may get into serious trouble. You may get a heart attack or have problems with diabetes and stuff like that and can't move around as quickly and get tired.

"But here is what I would do if I were you: I would go and exercise every day, stop eating at night, eat only two meals, be disciplined and blah, blah, blah, all of those kind of things. I will give you a plan and you can follow it or not.

"So it's not I'm criticizing you. It just really means I care about you, and I want you to live and feel as good as I do and do as well as I do." And that's what I basically did with the Republican Party.

Also: he thinks Rudy will be the Republican nominee for president. Why? Because he's "the most consistent, stable person" out there. Hoo boy. The Republican Party must be in even worse shape than he thinks.

Kevin Drum 1:14 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (53)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

Yeah, he should have called them "girlie men." Then he could say he was here to "pump you up!" [clap].

Posted by: Bush Lover on September 20, 2007 at 1:20 AM | PERMALINK

Yes, Rudy is known for his stability and his calm zen like transcendental powers. He's a regular down at the monastary. He amazes the monks with his ability to lie buried for days at a time. He does this by lowering his metabolism and body temperature by 5 degrees to 47 degrees farenheit.

Posted by: AnotherBruce on September 20, 2007 at 1:28 AM | PERMALINK

My buddy in NY said he heard that Rudi has a new mistress. They are trying hard to shut the girl up but......Oh boy Rudi is stable...

Posted by: bob on September 20, 2007 at 1:32 AM | PERMALINK

They are trying hard to shut the girl up

Rude-ee has really got to stop dating screamers....

Posted by: Disputo on September 20, 2007 at 1:38 AM | PERMALINK

Hate to say it, as eight more years of a Republican presidency will not be exactly good for my health, mental or physical, but the leading Dem candidates do not look very hot either, at least in light of the continually emerging narrative about them in the press.


Posted by: gregor on September 20, 2007 at 1:49 AM | PERMALINK

Said one narcisist about another.

Posted by: notthere on September 20, 2007 at 2:32 AM | PERMALINK

Arnold is going to defect to the Democrats shortly after this term as governor ends, if not before. He's far too smart to stick with a losing side, and loyalty is really not a noted Hollywood virtue.

Posted by: brooksfoe on September 20, 2007 at 3:30 AM | PERMALINK

If I see you killing 100 people and wasting $1 billion dollars every day, I would say something. I would say: "Hasta la vista, baby!"

Here is what I would do if I were you: I would end the war, provide health insurance, regulate housing lenders, return to a tax table that funds our government, stand up for human rights, reduce global warming, restore New Orleans, and destroy Al Qaeda.

I'm not criticizing you. I really care about you.

Posted by: reino on September 20, 2007 at 7:08 AM | PERMALINK

Yes, and Rudy is so wonderful that Arnold will go along with plans to deliver 40% of California's electoral votes to him.

Posted by: bob h on September 20, 2007 at 7:15 AM | PERMALINK

Since California is a defacto one party state, it really demonstrates what the future of the U.S. The real question is what will the U.S. be like as a one party state after the Republicans collapse due to demographic trends coupled with the incompetence of the Republican administration.

Posted by: superdestroyer on September 20, 2007 at 7:33 AM | PERMALINK

Rudy is likely insane. He soars in the polls. That says more about all Americans than it does specifically about Republicans. Multiple wives. Affairs. Lies. Blindsiding a spouse with a publicly announced divorce request, eschewing a private discussion. Did I mention the affairs? Dysfunctional relationships with his children. Associating with, hiring and funding alleged or convicted felons. War profiteering. Monumentally bad judgement on multiple fronts. Yet he soars in the polls. America is sick.

Posted by: steve duncan on September 20, 2007 at 7:44 AM | PERMALINK

Have you seen Mitt Romney's latest ad.

It strikes the same theme. I am afraid some Republicans are actually starting to wake up.

Posted by: corpus juris on September 20, 2007 at 8:35 AM | PERMALINK

Steve Duncan, please take your meds. Seriously, you need to calm down. It's only politics, nothing that important. If America now is sick to consider Rudy a potential President, what was it when it elected and re-elected another leader with a messy and controversial personal life? We survived, some claim we thrived. America is strong, keep your perspective and enjoy precious life.

Posted by: Otis on September 20, 2007 at 8:41 AM | PERMALINK

Well, Rudy said in London for the Thatcher/Pinochet schmooze fest, that he is one of 4 or 5 most well known Americans. Hmmm, there's Pee Wee Herman, then...

Posted by: thethirdPaul on September 20, 2007 at 8:52 AM | PERMALINK

One clarification. It's "pump (clap) YOU up." Proceed.

Posted by: Hoyt Pollard on September 20, 2007 at 9:02 AM | PERMALINK

Nice touch for AHnold to hire the Blackwaters kicked out of Iraq to provide security at polling booths. And nice that Iraq has allowed the hiring of the University of Florida campus cops to replace Blackwater.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on September 20, 2007 at 9:07 AM | PERMALINK

Yeah Otis, everything is just ducky. 160,000 soldiers and the mightiest military in the world are waging genocide and inflicting destruction on a massive scale against a 3rd world nation. Americans as a whole express reservation when polled but do little else. Our Congress pushes for ever more war. Our President thinks the Constitution is a cumbersome impediment to the exercise of power and our Congress and courts agree with him. To you it's all just politics. You should be made to sit down and talk to the families of a few hundred thousand dead and maimed Iraqis. Or several thousand U.S. soldiers. You, Bill Kristol, Podhertz, Hadley, Perle, Bush, Cheney. All sick fucks.

Posted by: steve duncan on September 20, 2007 at 9:08 AM | PERMALINK

I haven't posted on it yet, but I have been simply amazed that the Republicans have been so rude to both blacks and hispanics. They seem to go out of their way to piss on both. If you look at the demographics, pissing on blacks and hispanics is political suicide long term. Some Republicans get it, but most, like the leader of the Texas Republican party are clueless.

Manifesto Joe has a post about a Texas republican legislator who is changing parties because the demographics of his district are changing. Lots of moderate Republicans are jumping ship in Kansas. As a result, that reddest of states can now be describe as being purple.

Posted by: corpus juris on September 20, 2007 at 9:14 AM | PERMALINK

Jeebus, is anyone else reminded of Chance the Gardner in "Being There"? Arnold is sounding more and more like idiot savant everyone is just projecting their own prejudices and ideals upon:

President "Bobby": Mr. Gardner, do you agree with Ben, or do you think that we can stimulate growth through temporary incentives?
[Long pause]
Chance the Gardener: As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden.
President "Bobby": In the garden.
Chance the Gardener: Yes. In the garden, growth has it seasons. First comes spring and summer, but then we have fall and winter. And then we get spring and summer again.
President "Bobby": Spring and summer.
Chance the Gardener: Yes.
President "Bobby": Then fall and winter.
Chance the Gardener: Yes.
Benjamin Rand: I think what our insightful young friend is saying is that we welcome the inevitable seasons of nature, but we're upset by the seasons of our economy.
Chance the Gardener: Yes! There will be growth in the spring!
Benjamin Rand: Hmm!
Chance the Gardener: Hmm!
President "Bobby": Hm. Well, Mr. Gardner, I must admit that is one of the most refreshing and optimistic statements I've heard in a very, very long time.
[Benjamin Rand applauds]
President "Bobby": I admire your good, solid sense. That's precisely what we lack on Capitol Hill.

Posted by: Rich on September 20, 2007 at 9:47 AM | PERMALINK

reino at 7:08: Beautiful.

Posted by: shortstop on September 20, 2007 at 9:54 AM | PERMALINK

Why should anyone follow the advice of a fat pig like Arnold, his once-pretty face deformed by steroids and multiple plastic surgeries?

He's not just literally fat and ugly, he has the fat, ugly smugness typical of Republicans. A lifelong whore from the world of bodybuilding, he saw the Republican Party as the easy road to political success. He has no real political beliefs, just a desire for power, status, and money. Oh, well, I guess he is a true Republican.

Posted by: Anon on September 20, 2007 at 10:37 AM | PERMALINK

I was reminded more of "I like to watch" - As an aide runs off to get Warren, or the nee Kennedy lady rolls on the floor.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on September 20, 2007 at 10:37 AM | PERMALINK

Rich,

Great idea! A remake of "Being There" in which the main character, Chauncey Trainer, is a dim-witted personal trainer, rather than a gardner.

President "Bobby": Mr. Trainer, do you agree with Ben, or do you think that we can stimulate growth through temporary incentives?

Chance the Trainer: To stimulate growth, you require essential nutrients and plenty of exercise. No pain, no gain.

Posted by: Daryl McCullough on September 20, 2007 at 10:38 AM | PERMALINK

Yes, reino, but, so many Repugs are dyslexic - they want to destroy New Orleans and restore al-Quada - Must have an eternal enemy.

Posted by: stupid git on September 20, 2007 at 10:39 AM | PERMALINK

I think we might want to be careful about getting involved in the Republican Civil War. There are three factions:
1) The NorthEast Republicans - true moderates.
2) Western Conservatives - psuedo libertarians.
3) Southern Batshait Crazies - Hold the true power, only around since 1974.

Now when they are in equal power, the GOP dominates at all levels. But Rove made the stupid mistake of appeasing the Southern Boys to a silly level and now they are mad with power. They are to National Politics what Al Sharpton is the NYC politics. They'll have enough power to make you lose, but not enough to make you win.

Posted by: Dervin on September 20, 2007 at 10:44 AM | PERMALINK

What does Schwarzenegger know?

When he was young he wanted to be a soccer star- look how that panned out. He's a dreamer. Since then he's been living off of one kooky, hare-brained scheme after another, drifing around from one flop-house to the next. Maybe you want to provide some more behavior to help the wingnutt-o-sphere embellish on their definition of the word traitor, Arnie?

Or that's the conservative criticism I'd like to see, so I could have something to laugh at.

Posted by: Swan on September 20, 2007 at 11:01 AM | PERMALINK

"If you're not afraid, you're a coward." Rudi Giuliani's Core Message

Posted by: cognitorex on September 20, 2007 at 11:07 AM | PERMALINK

Rudy is at least consistent in his inconsistency. One can never know where he will stand except behind 911, which Rudy seems to think of as some sort of all-purpose fig leaf. As for being "stable", if by that the Governator means Rudy is a horse's ass...

Posted by: majun on September 20, 2007 at 11:09 AM | PERMALINK

Keep your criticisms in Thal, Austria, among your fellow Ostrogoths and Visigoths, pal!!

Mr. Olympia, my ass!! The multiple body-building world-title, string of high-grossing Hollywood pictures, world-wide fame, marrying a prominent Kennedy, and becoming governor of California even though you weren't born or raised in America and still had an obvious accent mean absolutely nothing! Didn't you ever hear of "stumbling into success"?!?

A thousand fat-ass American Rush-Limbaugh-esque loudmouths spouting off about things they may know jack about compared to you certainly know how to advise much better than you ever could, and they can do it while being fat junk-food swillers, to boot!

Posted by: Swan on September 20, 2007 at 11:13 AM | PERMALINK
Since California is a defacto one party state

Which "one party" would that be? The Democrats for whom the state has been a lock in Presidential elections for maybe a decade and a half (though not before that) and who have controlled the legislature but for brief interruptions for quite some time, or the Republicans who have usually held the Governor's office since the 1980s, but for a brief interruption?

Posted by: cmdicely on September 20, 2007 at 11:54 AM | PERMALINK
What does Schwarzenegger know?

Not a lot about nutrition and health if his weight loss advice is to eat two meals a day.

Posted by: cmdicely on September 20, 2007 at 11:58 AM | PERMALINK

cmdicely,

The Republican Party in California is so weak that Gray Davis could hand pick his opponent when he ran for re-election. The Republican party barely has 1/3 of the seats in the state house and has no prospects of ever getting anymore but will probably continue to lose seats overtime. The Republicans will also continue to lose U.S. House seats in California. The Republicans have no influence on policy but can only act as a speed bump to slow down the Democrats.

The only way that California has a Republican governor now is it took a recall election and a republican candidate who does nothing different that what Gray Davis would have done.

If one party gets everything it wants and the other party can never implement anything it proposes, then California is a one party state.

Posted by: superdestroyer on September 20, 2007 at 12:00 PM | PERMALINK

Not a lot about nutrition and health if his weight loss advice is to eat two meals a day.

To be fair, he does advocate grazing on steroids in several daily mini-doses, rather than gorging on two larger doses a day.

Posted by: shortstop on September 20, 2007 at 12:03 PM | PERMALINK

it is so unfair to say rudy located the emergency command center in the WTC so he could boff judy (also known as a 'kerik flat'). at the time rudy chose to put his bunker in a previously-targeted location, he was still boffing christine. (and was married to donna (wife#2) at the time)

maybe rudy's just a hero to guys who don't get laid a lot.


Posted by: benjoya on September 20, 2007 at 12:14 PM | PERMALINK

This is Being There in reverse.

Bush: When I fall down, it looks like the floor moves up.
Rove: With a little modification, that can be our war strategy.

Posted by: reino on September 20, 2007 at 12:17 PM | PERMALINK

gop is finished

Hypocrite Hillary(DC Experience Matters?JFK & Bill HAD LIL

This Video Is Showing That Hillary is a hypocrite for saying obama has no experience

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBy3AKn_2Fk

Posted by: kyle on September 20, 2007 at 12:19 PM | PERMALINK
The Republican party barely has 1/3 of the seats in the state house.

It has, I believe, between 37% and 39% of each house, which, if it was the US Congress, would mean 1-party dominance of the legislature. However, since its not, and it requires a 2/3 supermajority to pass a budget, the fairly coherent Republican block that the party usually manages to muster in at least one house can prevent a budget from being passed unless the caucus is appeased.

The Republicans have no influence on policy

Arnold's done a fair job of driving the agenda (outstanding early in his first term, but even after losing his later initiative efforts and the Democrats in the legislature supsequently recovering some spine, he's still managed), and Republicans in the legislature have wielded considerable policy influence through their ability to block the budget.

The only way that California has a Republican governor now is it took a recall election and a republican candidate who does nothing different that what Gray Davis would have done.

That's a rather laughable description of Arnold. Now, certainly, he hasn't done everything the Republicans in the legislature would like, but he's been significantly out of step with what Gray Davis would do and, in fact, what Gray Davis was doing.

If one party gets everything it wants and the other party can never implement anything it proposes, then California is a one party state.

Yes, and it was the Republican party that wanted and proposed the VLF rollback, the idea of a Constitutional Amendment restricting spending increases, and numerous other of the policies implemented during Arnold's term; meanwhile, the Democratic Party wanted (and even passed throught he legislature) universal healthcare (SB840) which was stopped dead by the Republican Governor, and have been frustrated in budgetary priorities by Republicans in the Legislature and the Governor.

No party gets everything it wants in California. Not even close.

Posted by: cmdicely on September 20, 2007 at 12:31 PM | PERMALINK

Kyle, watching those we chose has a campaign video of the day feature. You might want to nominate your video. I have watched the video by the way and don't think it supports your claim that Hillary is a hypocrite. It simply does show that experience isn't everything.

Of course, Hillary claims experience counts because it does. In the current world the kind of simple competency experience usually insures would be refreshing.

Posted by: corpus juris on September 20, 2007 at 12:35 PM | PERMALINK

Not a lot about nutrition and health if his weight loss advice is to eat two meals a day.

Just to police the cheap shots, what exactly is perilous about eating two meals a day? Do you think he wouldn't recommend that they be two meals of balanced nutrition? I think for your criticism to be on point, he would have to recommend too few calories, which he of course didn't. Didn't even say, "Don't eat, besides two meals a day." So he's not even really saying don't have a little snack, or half a meal at night, or anything. And then again, he's talking off-the-cuff, just making an ad hoc analogy. But hey, he only won Mr. Olympia like seven times. He can't know more about nutrition than a bunch of you guys whose best measurments are probably like half what his were in his heyday...

And if he did steroids (he admitted to it in an interview) he seems to have done it in moderation and survived it. I don't think doing steroids is an advisable thing at all, but all these criticisms are ignoring his successes which are a lot different than, say, Bush's handed-to-him-by-daddy successes. This guy made himself over here with nothing and is a lot more successful that the vast majority of us will ever be.

Posted by: Swan on September 20, 2007 at 1:53 PM | PERMALINK
But hey, he only won Mr. Olympia like seven times. He can't know more about nutrition than a bunch of you guys whose best measurments are probably like half what his were in his heyday...

Body building isn't nutrition, and getting huge measurements isn't weight loss. What's your point?

Posted by: cmdicely on September 20, 2007 at 2:05 PM | PERMALINK

Puny girly-men...

Body building isn't nutrition, and getting huge measurements isn't weight loss. What's your point?

You obviously don't know much about body building, because it' like 90% nutrition and 10% harder physical work and focus that 99% of people put into their lives. There is so much care and know-how that competing professional body builders put into their nutrition that it's almost unbelievable.

The body building diet is focused around keeping a body lean and building muscle, so it's like a focused version of the goals of popular weight loss diets. Everything an average person who just wants to lose weight has an incentive to know about and do, a professional body builder has a lot more incentive to know and do. So that's what body building has to do with it.

Posted by: Swan on September 20, 2007 at 2:10 PM | PERMALINK

Why hasn't there been a hick Mr. Olympia? There's Arnold, and then I think there's been a black guy, a British guy, even an Arab guy.

I guess all the hard-working guys in the West were destroyed when the big, conservative supporting corporations took over their farms in the 1920s, and earlier. Now everyone that's left out there are just the people who know how to complain about other people, and mischaracterize and misunderstand liberals all day long.

Posted by: Swan on September 20, 2007 at 2:13 PM | PERMALINK
The body building diet is focused around keeping a body lean and building muscle, so it's like a focused version of the goals of popular weight loss diets.

Not very much like it; a body-building diet tends of necessity toward high-calorie-density items, where sustainable weight-loss diets ("popular" weight loss diets are mostly marketing gimmicks that people work from one to the next because they tend not to work in the long-term, but they sell more "how to" product that way, and its a big industry) focus on satisfying hunger and nutrient needs with a balanced array of foods that are generally not calorie dense.

Everything an average person who just wants to lose weight has an incentive to know about and do, a professional body builder has a lot more incentive to know and do.

Actually, a lot of things an average person who wants to lose weight has an incentive to do, a professional body builder has an incentive to do eitehr the opposite or at least far less incentive to do. And vice versa. Both in diet focus and exercise priorities. There are some similiarities, but its not at all as much the same as you are trying to paint it.

Posted by: cmdicely on September 20, 2007 at 2:36 PM | PERMALINK

Anyone who could get within spitting distance of within spitting distance of where Arnold Schwarzenegger was as far as achievment in pro body building would be able to tell a person how to calculate their calorie consumption needs. He or she wouldn't tell them to consume the same number of calories he does a day. The point is that the content of the body building diet aims at promoting muscular growth and leanness. If a person followed a body-builder approach to diet and exercise, what would happen to them is the same thing that happens to a body builder: they would lose a lot of fat and gain a lot of muscle, over time. I have yet to hear of one person who tried to follow body building advice and f'd it up so badly that it turned them into a big fatty.

Granted, I am sure there are a lot of people out there who focus on fitness and nutrition and are more focused on it now that Arnold is now, and are more up to date on it. But Arnold is a big fitness-head, and saying that he doesn't (or pro body-builders don't) know a lot about fitness or nutrition betrays, at least, ignorance of the subject and almost definitely at least a little arrogance and irrationality-- unles the speaker is just being intentionally dishonest.

cmdicely wrote:

Actually, a lot of things an average person who wants to lose weight has an incentive to do, a professional body builder has an incentive to do eitehr the opposite or at least far less incentive to do. And vice versa. Both in diet focus and exercise priorities. There are some similiarities, but its not at all as much the same as you are trying to paint it.

You're mischaracterizing it. A body building diet/exercise regimen is a focused, or more extreme version of a generic fitness or weight loss regimen. It does the exact same thing to you: decreases fatty weight in favor of lean weight. There is no way these could do the same thing by doing "opposite" things. A body builder diet will curtail fat calories just as a generic one will. If the bodybuilder needs more calories to gain muscle, he eats more calories, but every body builder knows you don't eat calories that are in excess of the exercise you do, thereby leading to non-lean weight gain. It's absurd that any body builder would not understand that. You're trying to say that I would recommend to another person that you follow a body builder's specific diet, when what I'm saying is that it's the principles that count (the principles are pretty simple).

Posted by: Swan on September 20, 2007 at 3:19 PM | PERMALINK

He or she wouldn't tell them to consume the same number of calories he does a day.

=

He or she wouldn't tell them to consume the same number of calories he- the body builder- does a day.

Posted by: Swan on September 20, 2007 at 3:21 PM | PERMALINK

Here's a quick list of things a pro body builder has at least as much, but probably more, incentive to do than an average person who wants to lose weight, just for people who may be taken in by this guy:

-exercise
-eat lean
-don't eat right before bed
-don't eat "empty" or "junk" calories (sweets, fats)
-don't be sedentary/over-eat
-make sure to include some cardiovascular exercise (cross-train) and not just weight-lifting / less cardiovascular activities
-tailor calories eaten to body's needs so there are not excess calories that will be turned into stored fat
-calculate correct proportion of calories to be eaten among protein, fat, and carbs.

Posted by: Swan on September 20, 2007 at 3:36 PM | PERMALINK

-don't be sedentary/over-eat

I meant to write "-don't be sedentary/oversleep" here- I just don't want to be accused of being repetitive.

Posted by: Swan on September 20, 2007 at 3:38 PM | PERMALINK

Pie helps me lose weight. Lots of pie.

Posted by: shortstop on September 20, 2007 at 3:48 PM | PERMALINK

shortstop,

Try pi instead - Works even better.

Posted by: Ghost of Euclid on September 20, 2007 at 4:36 PM | PERMALINK
You're mischaracterizing it.

No, I'm not "mischaracterizing" the same thing you are describing, I'm saying you are wrong.

A body building diet/exercise regimen is a focused, or more extreme version of a generic fitness or weight loss regimen.

No, its not a "more focussed" or "more extreme" version of the same thing. There are some common underlying basics, but neither is "more focussed", they are just focussed on different things.

It does the exact same thing to you: decreases fatty weight in favor of lean weight.

It might, but that's certainly not true in the general case; both will tend to increase the lean body mass to total body mass ratio, and a body building regime might incidentally reduce fat mass in a neophyte, but a body builder (or even just an athlete) may well already be at about (or, especially for female body builders, below) their safely maintainable fat mass for general health and still be working on developing muscle mass.

There is no way these could do the same thing by doing "opposite" things.

They aren't aiming to do the same thing.

A body builder diet will curtail fat calories just as a generic one will. If the bodybuilder needs more calories to gain muscle, he eats more calories, but every body builder knows you don't eat calories that are in excess of the exercise you do, thereby leading to non-lean weight gain.

If you don't consume calories in excess of the exercise you do, you won't gain any weight, lean or otherwise—if everything you digest is being converted into energy output, there is nothing to build muscle with. If you are maintaining a calorie deficit, you will lose weight. To build muscle, you need a calorie surplus and resistance exercises to promote muscle building. You need aerobic exercise for general cardiovascular health and for metabolic efficiency so that the resistance exercises are efficient.

For weight loss, OTOH, you need aerobic exercise to keep your metabolism from slowing down in response to the calorie deficit and thus reducing or eliminating the deficit, even with the reduced calorie intake, and for general cardiovascular health, and you need resistance exercise to maintain lean body mass while losing overall mass; without it, you risk losing muscle along with fat.

So the opposition here is that in body building, the resistance exercises are the key to the principle goal and the aerobic portion is supporting, in weight loss the reverse is true.

You're trying to say that I would recommend to another person that you follow a body builder's specific diet

No, I'm trying to say exactly the words I've said. I am not "trying to say" anything of the kind you characterize here.

You are suggesting that the priorities are the same for a body builder in terms of exercise and diet, just that a body builder's regime is "more extreme". I am saying the priorities and focus are different in orientation and qualitatively, not just in "extreme"-ness or quantity.

Here's a quick list of things a pro body builder has at least as much, but probably more, incentive to do than an average person who wants to lose weight

Most of those are highly general and not the kind of thing that would indicate that being Mr. Olympia would make you an expert on weight loss (indeed, some of them lead to opposed priorities in the context of weight loss vs. body building), and at least one is dead wrong: while both people seeking weight loss and people seeking body building have an incentive to have some cardiovascular exercise, the incentive to focus on cardiovascular exercise rather than exclusively or predominantly on weight training is not "at least as strong" for bodybuilders as for weight-losers.

Anyhow, if you want to think that being a body builder somehow makes you an expert weight-loss dietitian, go ahead and believe that. Its hardly the most irrational link between "experience" and "expertise" that people are prone to believe in, and at least as not as harmful to the public interest as, say, believing that film experience makes someone an expert in public policy.

Posted by: cmdicely on September 20, 2007 at 5:01 PM | PERMALINK

Geez, nine thousand, eight hundred and forty seven words to describe losing freakin' weight -

Simple - Cut processed sugar intake and carbs - smaller portions and regular exercise - Dropped over 35 pounds in less than nine months. Blood sugar dropped dramatically, as well - So did bad cholesterol. Feel far stronger and healthier - Of course, having my primary care doc at the VA warn me of the dangers of losing eyesight and feet due to diabetes Type II, provided a touch of motivation. True, there is no catchy "Diet Title" for selling a book.....

Posted by: thethirdPaul on September 20, 2007 at 5:08 PM | PERMALINK

The problem is that the diet advice of "Eat Less, Exercise More" won't fill an entire book, nor can it be easily monetized. It's the same reason why solar energy has languished forever.

Posted by: Disputo on September 20, 2007 at 8:18 PM | PERMALINK

Norman Podhoretz is there to smooth out Guilani's rough edges so not to worry.

Posted by: zed on September 20, 2007 at 9:47 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly