The Diet Distraction Documented

The Politico has an attractive story called Members battle the bulge. However, if you're hoping this is a piece on the proposed multi-trillion dollar budget, this isn't it. Instead, this is a piece on why the American people, members of congress, and lobbyists tend to be gaining more weight in the economic downturn, while reporters remain in good health through increasingly troubling times.

“Health experts say the economic downturn has wreaked havoc on Americans’ diets, as people cancel gym memberships, dine at fast-food restaurants and, in some cases, take on additional work hours as companies shrink their work forces.” (emphasis added)

“Members say endless lunchtime meetings, heavy travel schedules and late-night hours have caused traffic to pick up both in the Senate gym and at the cafeteria salad bar.” (emphasis added)

“But her most unhealthy clients aren’t politicians; they’re lobbyists. Tallmadge says many former Hill employees gain weight after taking jobs on K Street, where the workday often means more restaurant meals, less walking and often, a parking space in the office building.” (emphasis added)

“The most in-shape people on the Hill: the reporters. Tallmadge says one of her journalist clients has clocked in an average of 17,000 steps a day while scrambling for interviews.” (emphasis added)

Question the source. Who are the health experts, and what are there reasons? Which members of congress? The article cites Sen. DeMint and Rep. Barney Frank, but congress has 535 members! That’s 533 members not mentioned.

What makes Tallmadge more credible than the journalist who wrote the article, Erika Lovley? Are journalists so credible that referencing themselves boosts, rather than reduce, their credibility? Yet, the media constantly plays this elementary game called telephone.

Wouldn’t truly harsh economic times force people to diet? If an American has to live on a tighter budget, I’d expect him or her cut spending on the food budget. Less food means that people gain less weight. As Marty Seifer says, “When the water hole dries up, the game start looking at each other differently.” Perhaps in these tough American times modern journalists would say something like, "When the water hole dries up, everyone starts stuffing themselves, except the magnificent journalists who work hard policing the situation before it gets out of hand."

Letter to Minnesota Governor (Congress Misbehaves Over Baby DNA Privacy)

Dear Governor,

Taking in the gravity of the position of Governor, it is unfortunate today that a lonely citizen of Minnesota such as I has to be the one to inform you that the state's congress is misbehaving regarding a simple bill, however that does seem to be the case. I have (as well as my new-found friends at the CCHC)

1) Contacted my legislators by email and phone with no response.
2) Visited the capitol several times on "hearings" regarding HF 1341/SF 1478, and have tried to testify on it personally only to be stonewalled by democrats.

I would expect this issue to reach the ears of the Governor if the media was not so inarticulate in matters that might actually concern the people of the great state of Minnesota. Therefore, as a last resort, I must ask for a reprieve from the Governor in this usurpation of The People's rights.

There is a concern among many constituents in Minnesota over the data privacy of the new born infants. Many of us understand as a matter of fact baby DNA is not state DNA. This is of course true, and the law requires that the HHS DNA database of 820,000 be destroyed. This is not even a dispute between differing ideologies, but a matter of law. I no longer expect my legislators to understand the concerns of state control over baby DNA, however there should be a bare minimum that our legislators understand those concerns do exist.

It is understandable that there are those who want to advance science and to use infants as a vehicle to prove their dedication to such endeavors. Given that the HHS is in violation of the law, and is currently ignoring the law (and there is no evidence to support any other conclusion), the precedent being set here is not one of reasonable men and women. Essentially, supporting HF 1341 and its counterpart SF 1478 is affirming that science trumps reason. This is doubly troubling to those who have taken a brief look at some of the darker chapters of the history humanity concerning genetic research.

Again, at the bare minimum there is an understanding among many who are aware of the issue that baby DNA is not state DNA. They will grow distrustful of their doctors, and possibly even the medical profession. I implore my legislators to vote against HF 1341 and SF 1478, because I believe unabashedly that all ideologies understand the necessity of the patient/client relationship that is currently in jeopardy. That sacred relationship should not be infringed upon by legislators. We all share the same wonders towards what lies ahead, but lets put our best feet forward.

Governor Pawlenty, I beg you to use the media to explain the issue fully to Minnesotans, and to articulate why it must be vetoed if found in the final form of legislation. If the bill is passed with HF 1341 or SF 1478, then as a republican and a big 'A' American, as a final recourse I must have the constitution to abide by my patriotic duty as a private citizen to help maintain the Republic in which we both reside. I must lend my support and vote for someone who will stand with We The People on this issue, and will retain the peoples' rights with We The People.

Sincerely,
Jordan Jelinek