Two consoling things about an Obama win

2. We all will have lived to see the moment when a 109-year-old black woman whose father was a slave cast her ballot for the first black president. God bless America.

Barack Hussein Obama is not a black man. He's half white - i.e., a mulatto.

He is claiming to unite, not divide, America. He is as much a white man as he is a black man. Whites who vote for Obama are as much voting for a white man as blacks who vote for Obama are voting for a black man.

Until people - Americans, reporters, pundits, gang members, churchgoers, drug users, politicians, beer drinkers, movie watchers, etc. - stop promoting and aiding and abetting the "one drop" rule whereby anyone with any "black" blood in him or her is thereby a "black man" or a "black woman," the very things they say and write will enforce and reinforce continued racism. And those who are both black and white should aid the cause by refusing to be pegged as being only one or the other.

On second thought, I probably shouldn't be aiding and abetting the threadjacker... the original thoughts (about Pollan, about Ms. Jones) are dead on. Must remember I cannot help everyone who is wrong on the internet...

The Clintons will be finished.

Remember this. IF Obama wins, the Democrats have two years to bring back cheap fuel, by whatever means necessary, or they will be out of power in Congress.

Forget everything else. That is what the voters want and that is what they will get.

After 8 years of having a president who stubbornly sticks with his own personal views no matter what, it will be great to have a president who reads, learns from what he's read, and modifies his stance on issues based on what he's learned.

Teddy Roosevelt was like that; he didn't believe in any kind of government regulation at all until he read "The Jungle" and other works by the "muckrakers" of his day.

And I know this was Rod's main point, but can we crunchies just stop for a minute and appreciate the prospect of a president familiar with Pollan's work?

I mean, come on! What are the chances of W. ever picking up the man's work, let alone engaging with it honestly and having it influence his decision making in any form?

So what if Obama still supports ethanol? He's a presidential candidate, of course he does! It's in the rulebook somewhere, I think. Let's see what happens over the coming months and years, and be hopeful about this interesting development.

(Unless you're already convinced Obama Stormcrow's arrival heralds our impending doom, in which case please just carry on. No optimism for you!)

Bless,
Doug

It would be great to end the ethanol subsidy, but I doubt that Obama will do it. Iowa is a big corn-producing state. It is also the state with the first contest in the Presidential election cycle.

If the first contest was in Idaho, we would be subsidizing ethanol made from potatoes. 8-(

I, too, think corn based ethanol is ridiculous. A prime example of expidient politics over well-reasoned policy.

The story of the 109 year old voter brought tears to my eyes. How wonderful for her and her family. The fact that this woman paid poll taxes to vote on a $20 a month salary makes me tingle inside, and makes me even more of a believer in democracy.

FWIW, if I look at photos of my school classmates through the 1960s and early 70s, it was very rare to see an overweight kid. Then we all grew up, became middle aged commuters, and packed on weight while nearly killing ourselves carpooling kids to soccer -- and then staying up too bloody late finishing up the day's work. At least, those of us without nannies (!).

Now, drive by my local schools and I see the number of kids who are a bit pudgy, and it shocks me.

I've had to work years to get the weight off from endless hours sitting on tarmacs, freeways, and in meetings. It's no way to live, and it disgusts me that I can't deduct health club expenses from my taxes -- if I'm at least trying to be healthy, which is a socially responsible act, then why can't the government incentive good conduct?!

To have a president of ANY party who connects the food supply, the economy, energy use, and health into one coherent theme called "food production" would be a huge improvement over the stupidity we've labored under.

This is one area where I respect Bill Clinton, Huckabee, and Obama - and my sense is that a whole lot of people need to bury some hatchets and pay more attention to the food that's making us all overweight, and the lack of parks and recreation programs that are impacting children's health and learning.

This nexus of problems should not be 'owned' by any party or politician.
Everyone needs to be talking about this, and figuring out how to see the ripple effects of our food policies.

readeroftealeaves: FWIW, if I look at photos of my school classmates through the 1960s and early 70s, it was very rare to see an overweight kid. Then we all grew up, became middle aged commuters, and packed on weight while nearly killing ourselves carpooling kids to soccer -- and then staying up too bloody late finishing up the day's work ...

ROTL, a fair # of people gain weight in middle age.

As far as "not seeing an overweight kid," I was a teen in the 1960s/early 1970s too, and there were fat kids in all my schools, in two different cities half a continent away.

Less than we observe today, I will admit. But I think what you are seeing today is that fatter people probably have been having more children - and passing those genes on to their kids. It makes sense, as Hispanics and African-Americans have much higher rates of obesity - and far more children than whites, too.