Since Zak is off this week and I had a bout of insomnia last night (coffee in the morning and caffeinated tea in the afternoon are my suspected culprits) I slept in this morning and headed out for my run around 8.

My workouts this week are going to be scheduled with a 5K this Saturday in mind. I’m hoping to beat my 5K PR (personal record) from this spring and run it faster than 23:21. Getting my runs in early this week so I can rest toward the end of the week and (hopefully) kick my own ass on Saturday.

I ran 5.28 miles at comfortable pace this morning in just under 43 minutes. I came back and pounded some watermelon and watermelon juice.

I hope no one else wanted any.

Before I headed out I replied to an email that appeared in my inbox this morning forwarded to me from a family member. A quick Google search reveals the author of the contents of the email forward is Bob Lonsberry, a conservative local radio talk show host. I replied before I knew who wrote it, and on my run I decided it was blog worthy.

Have something to say on this? Please do. I’d be curious to know what you think, whether you agree with me, agree with the author or none of the above. It’s lengthy but I eat this stuff up (literally?) and I won’t be offended if you disagree with me or if you choose skip this and move on to something you find more interesting in cyber space. The original article is in bold. My comments are italicized.

Bob Lonsberry’s original article can be found here.

NOW THEY’RE COMING AFTER YOUR FOOD

I told you so.

Years ago I said the next target was food.

In its tireless quest for power and money – done in the name of protecting you – the government has gobbled ever-larger chunks of the economy.

Tobacco, health care, communication, energy, banking, the automotive industry.

And now food.

A national soda-pop tax has been proposed, the Urban Institute wants to go after food producers and family budgets the way it went after tobacco companies and smokers, and food is about to be called a hazard to your health.

The majority of foods on the shelves of a grocery store ARE a hazard to our health.

Ostensibly, because you’re fat.

Actually, because the government wants your money.

The one habit people can’t give up is eating. The one portion of the economy that truly controls the people is the food supply. In the past the government sought to protect it, now it wants to conquer it.

More correctly, now the government wants to conquer you.

And it will do so in the guise of protecting you.

As you may have noticed, Americans are fat. Some two-thirds of Americans are overweight or obese. It is a national shame. And it is a threat to our health.

But it is also a threat to our freedom.

Because when the activists point to the supposed $200 billion in annual health-care costs blamed on people being overweight, they are really just building a case to take away from you the ability to decide – or afford – what’s for dinner.

This is in the news because, in addition to the soda-pop tax, the Urban Institute has a new study out that calls for dramatic taxes on “unhealthy” foods.

Before we try to figure out what “unhealthy” is, let’s figure out what the Urban Institute is. Basically, it’s the government. It was founded by the government and is funded by the government – 62 percent of its budget comes from the feds – and since the days when Lyndon Johnson got it rolling, it has been a steady apologist for and advocate of socialist, big-government programs.

And it says food should be treated like tobacco. Producers should be taxed or sued into massive revenue-sharing agreements, and consumers should be heavily taxed.

The theory is that people who produce or eat food are bad, that they are the cause of the obesity epidemic and they must be forced to pay. The problem is that they are us. While a minority of people smoke, a majority of people eat.

And that’s a good thing.

So is the system of producer, processor and distributor that takes the tiniest fraction of our population and from its agricultural productivity feeds not only our country but also millions of foreigners. Astoundingly, we are being trained in this society to bite the hand that feeds us, to resent the farmer as a polluter and barbarian, somehow cruel to both the environment and livestock.

We have been taught phrases of contempt – like “factory farm” and “big agra” – and the prejudice against our food supply is palpable. We have been conned into hating something we don’t know the first thing about. Large processing companies – that feed countless people here and abroad – are not thanked for their efficiency and productivity, but are castigated and condemned.

Then there are the folks who eat.

In the thinking of this report and its supporters, the free-will choices of Americans on something as elemental as what they eat or drink should be done away with. In order to get Americans to eat what and how much the all-powerful activists want them to eat, high taxes on “fattening” foods are being pushed.

While politics usually bore me, this is interesting. Here’s where this op ed loses credibility with me.

The problem – beyond the tyranny – is that there is no such thing as a “fattening” food. It doesn’t really matter what you eat, it matters how much you eat and how much you exercise.

Um, no. This could not be further from the truth. Sure, some things in moderation won’t make you fat per se, but what you eat DOES matter to your health. 2/3 of a Americans are overweight because they are eating the wrong things. Eat fruits and vegetables, eat meat and cheese. As Jillian Michaels says, if it came from the ground or had a mother, then eat it. But if it was processed and had all it’s nutritional value stripped from it, stay away. Does soda have a mother? What plant did a Cheeto come from? If you eat foods as close to their natural state as possible, you will automatically push away from the table when you feel full. You can get away with normal activity and maybe some moderate exercise and be healthy.

All food contains calories – little units of energy. In partnership with your level of physical activity, the number of calories your body takes in determines whether or not you gain weight. Twinkies are fine, depending on how many you eat. Fruit can be loaded with calories and an all-fruit diet – involving being idle and eating to excess – can make you just as fat as anything else.

Errr… no, Twinkies are NOT fine. Sorry. There is just no room for these in a healthy diet. Homemade cookies? Yes. Twinkies with 28 ingredients (thanks Holly!) are not fine.

If soda pop is bad for you, what about ice cream? Or chocolate? Or beef? Or cheese? Or eggs? Or pancakes and syrup? Or whole-wheat bread? Every one of those things has the innate capacity to contain at least as many calories as soda pop.

The majority of these items have one thing in common: High fructose corn syrup.

So where does the taxing start?

Tax everything that contains high fructose corn syrup. If you are outraged by this, stop buying these products. It’s that simple. I don’t buy this stuff. Problem solved. I buy dark chocolate. I buy real maple syrup. I make my own pancakes with flour and sugar and baking powder. I buy sprouted grain bread. I buy free range eggs. I buy cheese from grass fed cows. If I bought meat I would buy grass fed beef and free range chickens. Stop buying garbage that contains high fructose corn syrup and transfats. These food companies that seem to be an innocent victim here have taken advantage of us and have done everything they can to make food taste good and be made cheaply so we’ll buy their product over the next guys. High fructose corn syrup and transfats. These ingredients are cheap and make food taste good. They are addictive. Foods containing these items have been processed to the point where they are void of any nutritional value. Our bodies don’t know what to do with these faux foods and therefore turns it into fat. And not just any kind of fat. Toxic, cancer causing, hormone disrupting, dain bramaging fat.

That question can’t be answered.

I just did.

Smoking is a hazard to our health, no one will argue that. Why can’t the government make it illegal to smoke cigarettes? We have the freedom to make the choice to smoke or not. The tobacco industry has a right to sell their crops. Or something. I’m not as well versed on politics as I am on food and human nutrition. So I guess the same goes with soda and junk food. They can’t make it illegal to sell it or buy it, so they’re going to tax it? Works for me. I certainly won’t be paying that tax just like I don’t pay the tax on cigarettes because I don’t buy them. The more people take on that ideal the better. I fully believe that processed food is just as bad for us as cigarettes. They are also just as addictive.

So the objective becomes: Making sure this tax never starts.

The groundwork now being laid for this government raid on the food industry and on our family grocery budgets must be pounded back into the hole it dripped out of. Activists talk about the cost of obesity and how this money could fund health-care reform and how people need to be protected from themselves. They feel empowered by the current regime in Washington.

But they must not be allowed to take control of the food supply. They are about to try a money and power grab, and in so doing will interfere with our ability to feed our children.

And that’s not a matter of convenience or philosophy, it is a matter of survival.

I told you so.

They’re coming after food.

And we’ve got to stop them in their tracks.

What do you think about a proposed tax on soda? If you buy soda, would you still buy it you had to pay more taxes on it?