See also, Gateway Pundit:
When you walk through a grocery store and gaze upon all the damning headlines of America and American’s, obesity is one to critique a bit:
BMI does not take into account age, gender, or muscle mass. Nor does it distinguish between lean body mass and fat mass. As a result, some people, such as heavily muscled athletes, may have a high BMI even though they don’t have a high percentage of body fat. In others, such as elderly people, BMI may appear normal even though muscle has been lost with aging. Take for example, basketball player Michael Jordan: ”When he was in his prime, his BMI was 27-29, classifying him as overweight, yet his waist size was less than 30,” says Michael Roizen, MD.
See “How Accurate Is Body Mass Index, or BMI?”
And again:
The primary reason why over 60% of Americans are “overweight” has nothing to do with fast food, cars, or television; it is not because Americans are eating too much and exercising too little; nor is it because of any “fat” gene within us; nor is it because of any clear evidence linking body weight to health. The reason why a majority of Americans are overweight is because a handful of scientists and government health officials, many with significant ties to drug companies, have arbitrarily designated “overweight” and “obese” at very low levels. These thresholds have little to do with any scientific evidence about weight and health and a lot to do with the pecuniary interests of academic researchers, government agencies, and the pharmaceutical industry. [According to the Body Mass Index — BMI] George W. Bush or Michael Jordan [in his prime] are “overweight” or Arnold Schwarzenegger is “obese,” (which they are according to our current standards), it is not because of their poor fitness or their precarious health. It is because the very people who are defining these terms stand to gain by setting a very low threshold for determining what overweight and obese should be.
See the article entitled, “The Curious Politics of Defining People by Their Weight”
Confirmed! 93% of Muslim voters, voted for Socialist Hollande
(Translation [by Eric Dondero]):
93% of Muslims have voted for Francois Holland A study released by the Institute for Surveys OpinionWay for the second round of elections finds a massive coalition of Muslims for the Socialist Party. It shows a rejection of Sarkozy-ism, but not all the parts of the values of the right, notably on the societal questions on homosexuality. The Muslims called for change, and they received it. According to a study of the electoral body by OpinionWay and Fidicuial for May 6 by Le Figaro, from 10,000 voters, 93% of the believers had slipped a Francois Hollande ballot in their envelopes. Only 7% of them voted for Nicolas Sarkozy.
We have been shouting at the top of our lungs for years here at Libertarian Republican about the growing alliance of socialists and Islamists. And now we have solid data from this French election. Islam does not, nor has it ever, been favorable to capitalism.
(Islamic flags were out in full display)
Walid Shoebat asks some pertenant questions:
✌ Wasn’t Hitler a socialist? After all, “Nazi” = National Socialist Party.
✌ Didn’t Hitler control France for a time?
✌ Didn’t the Muslims align with Hitler during WWII?
From the video description:
ABC News correspondent Jake Tapper on Monday grilled the White House press secretary over Barack Obama’s position on gay marriage and whether he will change his stance after the 2012 election. Tapper dismissed the President’s 17 month “evolution” on the topic as “cynical.” Yet, the ABC network skipped any coverage of his questions.
With statements like the following, this is not a tough guess/call:
Via NewsBusters:
As the program began, O’Reilly said, “Shortly after 11PM on April 14, 26-year-old Marjon Rostami and 31-year-old David Forster were coming home from the theater when someone threw a rock at their vehicle.”
The pair worked for the local paper the Virginian-Pilot.
Forster got out to confront the rock-thrower only to be set upon by approximately five African-Americans who beat him.
Rostami got out of the car to help her boyfriend leading her to be attacked as the car was surrounded by a crowd of about 30 people.
She ended up calling 911, and the police filed a report describing the assault as a suspected hate/bias crime arresting a sixteen-year-old. That has since been changed; police are no longer claiming it was a hate/bias crime.
However, Fox News’s Jesse Waters interviewed a witness to the event who verified Rostami and Forster’s account claiming that he felt this was a racial episode tied to the Trayvon Martin incident in Florida.
Walter Williams setting the record straight:
…According to an American Community Survey, by the U.S. Census Bureau, the top 10 poorest cities with populations more than 250,000 are Detroit, with 33 percent of its residents below the poverty line; Buffalo, N.Y., 30 percent; Cincinnati, 28 percent; Cleveland, 27 percent; Miami, 27 percent; St. Louis, 27 percent; El Paso, Texas, 26 percent; Milwaukee, 26 percent; Philadelphia, 25 percent; and Newark, N.J., 24 percent.
The most common characteristic of these cities is that for decades, all of them have been run by Democratic and presumably liberal administrations. Some of them — such as Detroit, Buffalo, Newark and Philadelphia — haven’t elected a Republican mayor for more than a half-century. What’s more is that, in some cases for decades, the mayors of six of these high-poverty cities have been black Americans. You say, “What’s the point, Williams?” Let’s be clear about it. I’m not stating a causal relationship between poverty and Democratic and/or black political control over a city. What I am saying is that if one is strategizing on how to help poor people, he wants to leave off his list of objectives Democratic and black political control of cities. According to Albert Einstein (attributed), the definition of insanity is “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
Crime is one of the results of the liberal agenda. Blacks are 13 percent of the population but are more than 50 percent of murder victims. About 95 percent of black homicide victims had a black person as their murderer. Blacks are not only the major victims of murder but also suffer high victimization rates of all categories of serious violent crime. Most often, another black is the perpetrator. During the 1960s, academic liberals and hustling politicians told us that to deal with crime, we had to deal with its “root causes,” poverty and discrimination. My colleague Thomas Sowell [click on book for all of Sowell’s books] has pointed out that in 1960, the total number of murders in the United States was lower than in 1950, 1940 and 1930, even though our population had grown and two new states had been added. The liberal agenda, coupled with courts granting criminals new rights, later caused the murder rate to double, and the rates of other violent crimes also began to skyrocket…
