What Obama and McCain eat

[Savage]

The McDougall Newsletter - Our President's Personal Health Matters

Oy vey. I'm voting for the Geico Caveman.

[Angela]

Thanks for that link. You know what strikes me? That McCain, after all he's been through with the melanoma, makes food choices of such hugely negative impact on his cells, presumably for the short term "energy" gain demanded by a stressful campaign. But all that sugar is not really energy, it's just stimulation. How can a person who is so disdainful of his own well-being possibly be entrusted with the well-being of a country?

[Athena]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

The McDougall Newsletter - Our President's Personal Health Matters

Oy vey. I'm voting for the Geico Caveman.

Why? Because Obama eats salmon?

You have to realize that you are on the far right side of the bell curve,

and very few people live there now.


The least you can do is vote for the one that is at least a little progressive, and ahead of the mass of the curve. The rest will get there, but you have to let the leader lead the masses.

[Barcs]

Salmon is one of my favorite foods as well. It looks as if Obama's diet and exercise is much better than McCain's. Although McCain is getting old and has some problems so I wouldn't expect him to run 3 miles a day. Cool article.

[ZHereford]

What isn't mentioned in the article is that McCain's 95 year old mother is fit, slim and sprite at her age and looks about 20 years younger than she is. Surely some of that has to do with good genes, which her son would have inherited.

Kudos to Obama for taking good care of himself, however, cancer (mother) and alcoholism (father) run in his family and both of his parents have passed on.

I agree that McCain should take much better care of himself if he hopes to run a country.

[ar81]

Do we know what people in Somalia eat?

[Bliss Sage]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

The McDougall Newsletter - Our President's Personal Health Matters

Oy vey. I'm voting for the Geico Caveman.

I find this attitude among Americans to be seriously disturbing. I think it is upsettingly Americentric, careless and irresponsible for a person to refrain from voting because a candidate is not exactly like they want him to be, because they eat salmon instead of raw cauliflower, for example. That a person will throw all two (well, it's America, so only 2 choices) candidates away and abstain from voting, even when it is clear the two candidates stand for very different things, for example, in a scenario where the victory of one candidate may bring a war in yet another country in the world without any provocation, and the victory of the other may bring problem-resolution by diplomacy and negotiation into the very same situation, saving literally thousands of lives. And this principle applies across the board for all issues on which the candidates disagree.

You may not like either candidate, but if John McCain would get elected by a minimal margin, and he subsequently attacks Iran, you personally chose that and you are therefore responsible for the subsequent deaths. I realize, however, that fish lives (not that you will save any by refraining from voting) are far more valuable than the lives of the unconscious people around the world. How can people not see merit in voting for the lesser of two evils?

I personally think America has an enormous responsibility to do right by the world and all of the countries it is fighting in and against (by which I mean civilians, of course) and all of the non-American people it is killing (realizing that life has no value unless it is an American life, which I feel is an unspoken and assumed mainstream premise in this country), and there are plenty of domestic issues, as well, on which Obama and McCain differ greatly.

To sit here and be taken aback by the candidates' diets, and on bases similar to this refrain from voting...America has shaken the stability of the entire world and holds that stability in the palm of its hands. There are entire populations in countries that many Americans (like "Joe the Plumber") would probably spit on if they even knew existed and these populations are desperately praying to God for the victory of a specific candidate for the sake of the very survival and safety of their own families, because in their hearts they know better than even we do, and they fear, if a certain candidate is elected, they and their country are at great risk of being attacked by the U.S., or otherwise badly affected or squashed like an ant in some way by the actions of the future president.

Americans don't think about it and don't know the extent to which elections here affect the whole world and how people watch who Americans vote for. The difference between Obama and McCain very probably is or could be a difference between life and death for thousands of Iranians (and a few, more valuable American soldiers), and God-only-knows what other peoples. I think it is a shameful decision to refrain from voting, especially with reasons that are so trivial and that stink of wealthy elite pursuits, when your vote can contribute to saving the lives of thousands and thousands of foreigners, who, even without an American attack, are not living in great luxury, financially, emotionally or spiritually speaking.

If you can't get inspired by either candidate, then get inspired by the responsibility you, as an American, hold towards all of the people in countries hosting American wars and all of the people in countries which will host the next American war if the greater of two evils wins the election.

Do you think the thousands of potential Iranian casualties give a rat's a§§ what Obama's and McCain's diets consist of? People are being killed every day in more than one country the world-over because of this country, and we will refrain from voting for the most peaceful candidate because he eats salmon??

[Savage]

Thanks, Bliss. I feel sufficiently spanked now.

Nevertheless, I will still decline to vote for any candidate who simply doesn't connect with me, as is my right to do so.

[Niamh]

Thanks for the article. Salmon is a wonderful choice; it's great for the mind. *hides from the rawavores*

[Angela]

My sense is that Obama is hungry for many of the same things I am hungry for, and that McCain's appetites make me feel a little queasy.

It looks to me like Obama wants joy, abundance, freedom, peace, connection, and love. And it looks to me like McCain wants to feast on power-over. Obama is hungry for self-awareness, I believe, and McCain is all about unconscious habitual negative thought pattern. I suspect that Mc has a limiting self-belief that is built around something that happened with his dad the admiral -- proving that he's good enough and avoiding people finding out he's not good enough. The exhaustion of that is why he appears older than his years. The bitterness that comes as you recognize the futility of trying to simultaneously prove your self-belief is not true and also trying to avoid others seeing that it IS true -- you can really see that in his "smile."

Steve notices his resonances/non-resonances showing up in what the candidates eat; I notice it showing up for me in how they relate to their wives and families. Barack and Michelle are warm arms for each other; John and Cindy appear to just barely tolerate one another. Yesterday I was very struck by John's statement that he had "had no idea" that Cindy was addicted to drugs and that she was stealing to support her habit. You have to be spectacularly unconscious to not notice in the slightest that your wife is feeling that horrible.

Steve sees it in food;
I see it in relationships;
In what area do you notice resonance/non-resonance with the candidates?

[Savage]

What we put in our bodies is one of the most fundamental choices we all make. It's a decision we make multiple times a day.

How someone makes this seemingly mundane choice -- over and over again, day in and day out -- says a lot to me about the kind of person they are (and where they might be headed). It's not the only thing I look at of course, but it does provide quite a bit of info. It tells me a lot about the person's current degree of alignment with truth, love, and power.

I'm well aware that the vast majority of Americans have value systems that are very different than mine. But when it comes to elections, I have to vote my conscience, which means voting for the person that I can connect with as an authentic leader. And in this particular election, my conscience doesn't feel strongly connected to either candidate.

However, I will say that there's no question in my mind that between Obama and McCain, Obama is much more in alignment with truth, love, and power, and consequently, he will be the better leader of the two. I think the most striking difference is in the love principle.

[Liveformx64]

The effect food has on your mental clarity is undeniable.

This has nothing to do with voting for who is most like me, and everything to do with the consciousness of the candidate.

Both are unqualified if you ask me, but definitely Obama has the edge.

Potato Chips, Jelly Beans, Doughnuts.... Enough said... All those refined sugars, and processed foods. I would be highly surprised if his mind doesn't deteriorate within the next 5 years right before our eyes.

[Poster]

What is meant by 'connect with', and what is an authentic leader?

I suppose I would like to vote for myself, but god help us all if I, an unpracticed politician, like this current president, were actually elected into office.

There are more than 2 people running for president. Do none of them suit you? Is it that you would only vote for the person you want to run, and if that doesn't happen, you'll be damned before you compromise. I've learned that sometimes life just doesn't go as I would have, but I find I must participate anyway.

[Savage]

When I don't resonate with the options that are presented to me, I prefer to simply eject and consider the choice from a progressively broader perspective until I find a path that does resonate with me.

This is my preferred pathfinding algorithm. When I hit a dead end, I backtrack until I find a new, unexplored path to explore.

If I didn't eject from choices I dislike, I'd probably be working at a job somewhere -- either job A or job B.

I simply don't believe in the Kobayashi Maru.

[Poster]

I find that sometimes it has to be about us and not just me.

I too am somewhat of an outlaw, but I don't see my voting for the best person as a threat to my independence.

While I'm about as far from a nationalist as can be (maybe not) in my opinion, I am too honored to live in the time and place I do to not participate in a process in which so many have sacrificed so much for me to have the right and obligation to voice my opinion on who represents me and my family to the rest of the world.

[supertom]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

What we put in our bodies is one of the most fundamental choices we all make. It's a decision we make multiple times a day.

How someone makes this seemingly mundane choice -- over and over again, day in and day out -- says a lot to me about the kind of person they are (and where they might be headed). It's not the only thing I look at of course, but it does provide quite a bit of info. It tells me a lot about the person's current degree of alignment with truth, love, and power.

I'm well aware that the vast majority of Americans have value systems that are very different than mine. But when it comes to elections, I have to vote my conscience, which means voting for the person that I can connect with as an authentic leader. And in this particular election, my conscience doesn't feel strongly connected to either candidate.



However, I will say that there's no question in my mind that between Obama and McCain, Obama is much more in alignment with truth, love, and power, and consequently, he will be the better leader of the two. I think the most striking difference is in the love principle.

McCain is big on your courage and compassion motto, steve just thought i let you know

[Lauxa]

I wish there were a "none of the above" option. Steve, would you vote for "none of the above"?

[Bliss Sage]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Thanks, Bliss. I feel sufficiently spanked now.

I didn't mean it to be a punishment. I thought maybe there were some aspects of the importance of the election that you might not have considered before making your decision and I wanted to be sure you were at least aware of the impact your decision has and will have. I may have expressed it in overly empassioned terms and I'm sorry about that if it comes off harshly. But at least I didn't make a video about it .

Anyway, I decided to turn that post into an article and maybe have it published on the Internet so I might be able to encourage some other people to consider the same issues and then reconsider any decision to abstain from voting. And I'll be sure to tone it down so no one thinks they are being punished .

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Nevertheless, I will still decline to vote for any candidate who simply doesn't connect with me, as is my right to do so.

I know and respect that, of course, though I don't understand it considering your particular values, as I understood them. In this case, however, fortunately Obama doesn't need your vote. Besides, this is the first American election ever that I'm voting in . I had more pressing issues every year of my life prior to this one, and I was less aware of what was going on in the world and even in this country and how the whole world was so affected by the acts and culture of this country.

Despite that, I often feel that it would be especially beneficial for you, for us (everyone who knows of you) and for your development, to expand your experiences beyond the borders of this country. I encourage you to travel, eventually even to poorer nations and nations with vastly more different cultures than ours. I think it's safe to say you have "conquored America" and there is a certain Ameri-centricity (and/or unawareness of other cultures and peoples' ways) of your approach and writings, and the farther away a culture is from American culture, I think the more difficult it is to apply and/or understand what you teach. Though it may also be that you are meant to stick to cultures closer to American. Maybe that depends on what you feel drawn to.

[wachusettgirl]

Originally Posted by Bliss Sage

I find this attitude among Americans to be seriously disturbing. I think it is upsettingly Americentric, careless and irresponsible for a person to refrain from voting because a candidate is not exactly like they want him to be, because they eat salmon instead of raw cauliflower, for example.
If you can't get inspired by either candidate, then get inspired by the responsibility you, as an American, hold towards all of the people in countries hosting American wars and all of the people in countries which will host the next American war if the greater of two evils wins the election.

Do you think the thousands of potential Iranian casualties give a rat's a§§ what Obama's and McCain's diets consist of? People are being killed every day in more than one country the world-over because of this country, and we will refrain from voting for the most peaceful candidate because he eats salmon??

I agree that the candidate's diets is of little importance with regards to their ability to make decisions and serve their constituents. I think that a ridiculous report about McCain liking Dunkin Donuts and Coke sounds like a brilliant "appeal to average Joe" campaignism. Please remember this is a democracy... On the other hand, I'm so impressed by the fact that Obama eats alot of salmon. I love salmon, and it has choline, no wonder he's so smart.

[wachusettgirl]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

This is my preferred pathfinding algorithm.)

Ow, that makes my head hurt.

[Claradonna]

This is true, but there's also a big lifestyle difference between politicians and writers. A writer, who is not contained by an institution, expected behaviors, or greater organ, has complete freedom to construct his own special habits.

A politician, has travel, hospitality, and time to consider. Think of how much time and work went into your own dietary choices, before you came upon this raw diet. And how far 'out of the standard' your diet is currently. You say yourself that raw diets take special consideration are socially limiting.

A politician does not have this kind of resource, and has far more external influences to balance with his lifestyle than you do now.

If Obama had a team of people to buy his 10lbs of daily fruit and vegetables, lug a juicer with him on his campaign stops, stopped connecting with voters over meals at local diners, and told heads of state 'no thank you' to their gourmet dinners, SURE he could do it, but that's not where his focus is right now. He is inside a 'standard' style of living that suits his position. If later he decides to optimize his diet, which surely will happen, especially as a critical mass moves toward the same lifestyle and makes it easier for everybody to live there, then it will happen.

Among politicians, Obama's diet is one of the healthiest. He eats in a way that is suitable for health, and hospitality, and his current social position.


Yours is a classic example of 'detached elitism', in which those who are ahead remove themselves from the rest of the masses. Rather than making small choices to help the rest of the people move forward to your position, you are removing yourself from helping them forward at all.


You are far on the right at point A, and there are very few people in the world there now.

and the 'masses' are far behind at point D.


You can choose a political leader who is at point B, going towards point A,


or say that, because no one is at point A now, throw your hands in the air


and hope that the masses don't get appointed with a leader who is still stuck at point D.

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

What we put in our bodies is one of the most fundamental choices we all make. It's a decision we make multiple times a day.

How someone makes this seemingly mundane choice -- over and over again, day in and day out -- says a lot to me about the kind of person they are (and where they might be headed). It's not the only thing I look at of course, but it does provide quite a bit of info. It tells me a lot about the person's current degree of alignment with truth, love, and power.

I'm well aware that the vast majority of Americans have value systems that are very different than mine. But when it comes to elections, I have to vote my conscience, which means voting for the person that I can connect with as an authentic leader. And in this particular election, my conscience doesn't feel strongly connected to either candidate.

However, I will say that there's no question in my mind that between Obama and McCain, Obama is much more in alignment with truth, love, and power, and consequently, he will be the better leader of the two. I think the most striking difference is in the love principle.

[Savage]

Perhaps I'll put my vote up for bid on ebay to see how much people really think it's worth.

[seeker5]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Perhaps I'll put my vote up for bid on ebay to see how much people really think it's worth.

Your vote, if it's done in secret, is probably worth about $3-$5 or so.

Your vote, if it's done publicly with you fully supporting the candidate on your website, is probably worth $30,000-$50,000 or more.

[floslib]

The vote itself? The same as every other vote by an American. Anything you say publicly beforehand about the candidates? Potentially quite a bit more, since you obviously have a large audience of readers who put some stock in your opinions.

That said, while I understand it's your right not to vote for someone who doesn't resonate with you, how do you think it serves the greater good, your growth, or other people's growth not to vote for who you think is the "best", even if you think that "best" is sorely lacking? Do you think it serves anyone's growth not to attempt to put the "best" candidate in power? Is there something else I'm missing while looking at your stance?

You say your loyalties are with humanity at large and that's reason not to vote, but what if that vote could move humanity in a better direction, even if it's not the best direction? I really am curious about this, since I've never understood why not work towards something better. Of course, you very well could be working toward something better in a different way, but it's safe to say I don't see it.

What about third party candidates? They certainly could use some support, if you think any are good picks. If they get enough support, we could finally break out of our two party system and see better candidate choices, since more candidates would have a chance to run and win. Naturally, this applies only if you think well of any third party candidates, and will still take some time to see happen, regardless.

Of course, if you don't vote, I won't hold it against you (not that you'd see that as a deterrent anyway). I actually know a lot of people who won't be voting, though I disagree with them. The way you talk about voting though, I'm fairly sure your reasons are different from theirs, which is why I'm curious, given your worldview.

[Savage]

Originally Posted by floslib

That said, while I understand it's your right not to vote for someone who doesn't resonate with you, how do you think it serves the greater good, your growth, or other people's growth not to vote for who you think is the "best", even if you think that "best" is sorely lacking? Do you think it serves anyone's growth not to attempt to put the "best" candidate in power? Is there something else I'm missing while looking at your stance?

Would it be okay for me to vote for what I think is best, even if it isn't a person running for political office?

[floslib]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Would it be okay for me to vote for what I think is best, even if it isn't a person running for political office?

Definitely, and you should do so.

The part I don't understand, and this gets to the crux of the matter, is why you can't vote for what you think is best alongside who you think is best. Are they truly mutually exclusive in this case?

Edit: Also, I'll stop after this post unless this is a conversation you want to continue.

[Plato]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Perhaps I'll put my vote up for bid on ebay to see how much people really think it's worth.

Hahahaha. That would be hilarious.

[Dan.Linehan]

Claradonna, I like your take on this. I would tend to agree.

I understand Steve's point though as well. Voting for anyone is, in essence, voting for someone else to run your country.

Collective bargaining is pretty important on a macro level though. We can't all be our own island.

Steve, honestly, I'm surprised that Obama doesn't resonate with you. He seems to be an almost perfect combination of Truth, Love and Power.

[Dan.Linehan]

Obama, by contrast, lost weight. He regularly ate the same dinner of salmon, rice and broccoli. At Schoop's Hamburgers, a diner in Portage, Ind., he munched a single french fry and ordered four hamburgers—to go. At the Copper Dome Restaurant, a pancake house in St. Paul, Minn., he ordered pancakes—to go. (An AP reporter wondered: who gets pancakes for the road?) A waiter reeled off a long list of richly topped flapjacks, but Obama went for the plain buttermilk, saying, "I'm kind of traditionalist." Reporters joked that if he ate a single bite of burger or pancake once the doors of his dark-tinted SUV closed, they'd eat their BlackBerrys.

The Long Siege | Print Article | Newsweek.com

[Shain McVay]

Notice how they commented on how long McCain smoked, yet didn't mention how long for Obama. It seems like the person who wrote this was trying to make a point, not give facts.