I do not believe there is any credible evidence that drinking alcohol reduces heart disease to any perceptible degree. I just don’t believe that.
Probably there are many, many brilliant and exhaustive studies and research reports that support that claim. Intelligent people are quite capable of putting the horse before the cart, i.e., I want to drink and therefore I will find a way to prove that drinking is good for me. We are going to find many self-serving scientific and medical studies that prove once and for all, conclusively that drinking alcohol is beneficial.
Alcohol is the number one sacred cow in the world. You don’t mess with peoples’ intoxicants. You can get yourself in trouble doing that.
I was in a country bar a couple years back having a buffalo burger and a coke. The guy with me was having a beer. I guess felt he had to justify it for some reason. Didn’t matter to me if he was having a beer. Anyway, he told me that his doctor said that drinking alcohol was good for his heart (didn’t do him too much good, as he died from a heart attack about a year later). I told him that I didn’t believe it. He looked at me like I had called his mother a mean name or something. He stood down from the bar stool, put up his dukes and said, threateningly, “Are you calling me a liar?”
Now that is commitment. He didn’t want anyone, especially me, being critical of his alcohol consumption. He was under doctor’s orders!
Being an accountant, where things have to make sense, where things have to balance out, where things have to accurately and fairly reflect reality, I just don’t believe drinking alcohol is going to do be of any significant benefit to the heart health of the vast majority of the human population.
We all are aware that statistics and studies are usually manipulated to fit the interests of those using them. Look at what happened at Leeds University. Oh, sorry, you likely are not aware of the scandal that erupted there.
Think of the things that people have come to accept as being proven to be true. The biggest joke around is biological evolution. People actually believe that humans evolved from pond scum. Hasn’t that been proven over and over and over to the satisfaction of every thinking human being? If you listen to the secular enlightened, it certainly has been. But if you ask yourself one question, you will find that it did not happen. No archeologist or biologist or evolutionary scientist has ever discovered any evidence of biological evolution from one species to another. There are no missing links between any species, let alone between ape and man. It didn’t happen that way. Oh, excuse me. I forgot about our tail bone. Darn, you got me there.
People get all confused between evolution and mutation and cross-breeding within a species and all that.
For some reason a large segment of our population wants to believe in evolution. I cannot ascribe motive, but for an accountant, it is weird watching people make leaps of faith billions of light years wider than the leap of faith that I take when I say that I believe that somehow God created man. I don’t know how God created man, But having witnessed large engineering organizations supported by massive banks of computing power, spending hundreds of millions of dollars to come up with hardware and software products, engineering marvels do not come about on their own. I have never, ever seen a school bus out in the middle of a hay field that just came into being. No one even imagines that school bus or a scooter or a computer or a car or a rocket ship or a tooth brush evolved from some lower form of engineering marvel. We all know someone designed and built all this stuff. We know it is all the result of human, intelligent design. We never question it.
But when it comes to biological life, which is trillions of times more complicated than a school bus, we all take it for granted that it just happened. It just evolved. It is absolutely astonishing what you can get people to believe! And the stunning argument we use to explain why it is possible? The argument of lots and lots of time. We all seem to believe that if you get enough monkeys in enough large buildings, each with their own typewriter and lots of paper and ink ribbons, etc., etc., they will, given enough time, reproduce all the literary works of Western Civilization. I don’t even start to believe that. I would believe biological evolution before I would believe that, and since biological evolution is based on the enough monkeys premise, I don’t believe in biological evolution. It is absurd.
I don’t know how it happened, but I am convinced that it didn’t happen on its own.
If you want to see some of our top evolutionists squirm, watch the movie Ben Stein made. It is very, very interesting watching Mr. Stein calmly and unemotionally asking serious questions that these scientists had apparently never before encountered or considered. The movie is “Expelled—No Intelligence Allowed.”
I don’t want to give you the wrong impression. I am not making judgments here. I don’t care if people want to drink or smoke pot or inject other drugs or starve themselves or grow obese or capable humans become shameless wards of the state. As hard as the concept is to comprehend, we each have free will. How someone chooses to live their lives is none of my business, and vice versa. If Hemingway and his band of friends want(s) to drink themselves into a stupor every night, why should I care? I just think that it lessens our earthly life experience.
In conclusion I believe that we should not go around encouraging and enabling people to drink alcohol. We should peel back the fog from our awareness and look at alcohol for what it is. Dangerous.
I want to express my gratitude and appreciation for your coverage of Mitt Romney. Your interviews of Mitt and Ann Romney this week were terrific. Well done. Much appreciated. No one has done as well as you.
There are those who say that Romney is wooden, and that they just can’t get excited about him, and that if he is our nominee they will be holding their noses as they vote for him. That confuses the hell out of me. I agree with Jack Welsh. We are very fortunate that Romney is willing to put himself and his family out there as our candidate for president. He is a proven conservative; he has had success in leadership; he has had success in running large organizations; he epitomizes the family values we all say we believe in.
What’s not to like? Why would any Republican in their right mind say that we would be better off staying with our current president?
No, it is time for us to stop saying that Romney just doesn’t excite us, and realize that it is up to us to get excited about him. I think the reason he does not excite a lot of Republicans is because they simply don’t want to get excited about him. For some reason, they refuse to look at the man honestly. They refuse to admit that he is a very friendly, warm, caring, intelligent, knowledgeable, experienced, talented, tough, principled, consistent, honorable, conservative man with a terrific track record of success in the private sector, in government and in his personal life.
He is doing his part. It is up to us to now do our part. We need to get excited about an exciting candidate. We need to work for his election. We need to vote for him and make certain everyone we can influence is voting for him as well. And if he is elected, we then need to fully support the man. We can’t do to him what we did to George Bush. We have to work with him to make certain he is successful. The forces of liberalism and socialism and secularism and welfarism and militant environmentalism and globalism that will be arrayed against him will be overwhelming to his administration if all we give is our lukewarm, nose-holding support.
And it is time for our other three candidates to do what Romney did four years ago. Romney had every reason to be very angry about how McCain and Hucklebee joined forces to stop him from winning the nomination. Instead, he enthusiatically threw his support behind our nominee, McCain. According to McCain no one worked harder to get McCain elected than Mitt Romney.
I am a JFK liberal. I have been one my entire political life. I, like JFK, believe in the American Constitution, the rule of law, a strong national defense, a vibrant economy, civil rights, separation of powers, states rights, international leadership, individual responsibility and compassion for others.
It was JFK who spoke the now-famous words in his 1960 inaugural address: ”And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.”
Those words had an impact on all of us who heard them. They rang true. They made sense. They renewed our perspective on our relationship with our government.
It is interesting to see how radically our views have changed since then. In the fifty-some years since JFK made that statement, our citizenry has made a “progressive” U-turn. A very large number of our citizens and our cultural and political leaders now say ”And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what you can do for your country–ask what your country can do for you.”
The philosophical differences between those two thoughts is profound. As President Kenney apparently knew and believed, a strong America depends on the self-reliance of its citizens. I believe that as well.