the trappings of eating healthy

As I was checking out of the aisle at Walmart (I haven't found much selection here for food), the cashier says, "Wow, you must eat really healthy," and this was followed by, "What is hummus? Some kind of bean product?"

Do it yourself, tarahumara hurache running sandals

I've been working on making my own hurache/tarahumara running sandals for sometime now.

Seeing some other examples, I've been working on these off and on for close to 2 years. I've tried a variety of materials, and tying methods.

I think I've come up with what works best for me.

So with my penchant for bikes, I found what works best is a relatively smooth BMX street tire due to it's width and lack of knobs. Some traction is good otherwise they can get "slippery when wet."

I first used 1/4" leather cord. These held together, but cut into the skin, which was rather uncomfortable. I switched over to a old pair of shoelaces I had, and these were a marked improvement. When these wore out, I found some 1/2 inch thick shoelaces. Best fit and usability thus far.

Now tying them was the biggest ongoing process. I have figured out how to tie them so that I can simply slip them on and off with having to retie them each time, and they still fit snugly enough for running.

A work in progress, but now a working solution.

Plus they make great Christmas gifts!

Did Lance Armstrong make a deal with the devil?

Lance Armstrong was an accomplished athlete at and early age, and a rising star. Surviving cancer boosted Lance Armstrong’s super stardom, then going on to win the toughest race in the world seven times in a row made his story awe-inspiring and miraculous! But is his story just a sweet fairy tale with the dark side being covered up? I sincerely want to believe his story is true, but there is a lot of evidence coming to light that he is not as clean as he portrays.

I think that it is quite possible that Lance did indeed make a deal with the devil. What price would people pay to make history, to become famous, to win? Lance would not be the first person to risk everything in order to stand at the top of a podium. I don't think anyone would argue that his personality drives him to be the one who will do whatever it takes to win. The chances of being caught doping are so low, and apparently worth the risk to so many. Especially when you have the hush money, or clout, or the right people in your corner.

Oakley - Giro - Trek - USA Cycling - Nike - every team sponsor, millions of fans, those afflicted with cancer, the media, his own foundation,

They all have a stake in ensuring he does not fall, and that his reputation is not tarnished.

And on the other side of the coin, who wants the truth to come out? - Does the Le Tour De France really want the most winning champion to be stripped of his titles? Does the International Cycling Union really want to clean up the sport of cycling? Do former teammates want to tear him down out of jealousy? Do other cyclists really want a fair playing field, or would they rather have their edge over the competition?

The only ones I can think of who have something to gain are the media being able to write a few more articles, and sell a few more advertisements.

Former teammate, and fellow US cyclist, Floyd Landis claims to have used the same model, even the same doping doctor, to pursue his own greatness. But Floyd's resources were not, and are not even close to those of Lance Armstrong. Floyd operated virtually independently, and still won the tour. This all came crashing down when he was caught, lost his wife and all his money to fight the charges, and eventually admitted to the illegal doping. Floyd's own words reveal an emotional, sincere, and hurt individual.

Even in interviews, Lance is well composed, and almost rehearsed with what sounds like lawyer-approved statements. He is constantly surrounded by his handlers, and well connected.

Without a doubt, Lance is a tremendous athlete who worked hard throughout his career and sought every advantage to be victorious. In a sport which doping is almost the norm, it would not be unreasonable to believe Lance many have sought advantages beyond what was legal. But these illegal advantages may have contributed to his cancer as well.

It could be possible that Lance Armstrong has been doping all along. Starting out as a teenage national champion triathlete, and a world road cycling champion at the age of 21, four years before being diagnosed with cancer. Common performance enhancing drugs (PED’s) may have caused the cancer in his body. The levels of Human Growth Hormone (HGH), steroids, testosterone and other PED’s an athlete would take to boost performance are continually being linked to cancers and disease.

And if doping did not cause the cancer, it is still probable that Lance doped.

I think there are millions of fans that hope Lance is clean. No other person has had such a profound impact on cycling within the United States. There are so many who hope Lance is a white knight who survived cancer and went on to do what no one else has been able to do.

Is it better for humanity to have the hero, or to know the truth?

Spin class will never again be boring...

And it is not like it will be the first time I got yelled at in a spin classes for doing my own thing. Now I will at least have a entirely plausible reason...

Maybe I could find a sport I'm really good at by combining other sports? Growing up I used to get in trouble for changing rules in the middle of the game, especially if I was starting to lose. Thus the advantage of being the oldest brother. Alas, when I started running in order to be competitive I had to keep increasing the distances until "good" runner's were intimidated by the distance, and not so much me. hmmmm...

I'll have to put some thought into Combi-sports where I will have an advantage.

Columbia University Heckles War Hero and one of their own.

MATTHEW MCDERMOTT

CLASH: Veteran Anthony Maschek (above, with fiancée Angela O'Neill) faced heckling from fellow Columbia students over ROTC (below).

Columbia University students heckled a war hero during a town-hall meeting on whether ROTC should be allowed back on campus.

"Racist!" some students yelled at Anthony Maschek, a Columbia freshman and former Army staff sergeant awarded the Purple Hear

t after being shot 11 times in a firefight in northern Iraq in February 2008. Others hissed and booed the veteran.

Maschek, 28, had bravely stepped up to the mike Tuesday at the meeting to issue an impassioned challenge to fellow students on their perceptions of the military.

"It doesn't matter how you feel about the war. It doesn't matter how you feel about fighting," said Maschek. "There are bad men out there plotting to kill you."

Several students laughed and jeered the Idaho native, a 10th Mountain Division infantryman who spent two years at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington recovering from grievous wounds.

Maschek, who is studying economics, miraculously survived the insurgent attack in Kirkuk. In the hail of gunfire, he broke both legs and suffered wounds to his abdomen, arm and chest.

He enrolled last August at the Ivy League school, where an increasingly ugly battle is unfolding over the 42-year military ban there. More than half of the students who spoke at the meeting -- the second of three hearings on the subject -- expressed opposition to ROTC's return.

J.C. RICE

From:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/hero_unwelcome_Zi3u1fwtRpo87vXAiAQfSN

It is disappointing that these students are being so shortsided. They are saying, "hey, we are anti military and we don't want your program at our school" - for whatever reasons they select.

Instead they could be welcoming the opportunity to educate future leaders of the military. If they don't like war/conflict - ignoring it will not make it go away. If they don't agree with policy - talk to politicians. If they don't like the way the military is run, train those who will be leading it.

There will be other schools who will educate military leaders, and it seems Columbia would rather put their head in the sand and heckle those willing to protect their rights to heckle.

Why is Ke$ha famous?

Is it the catchy lyrics of her songs? Musical talent or am I missing something? Snappy dress? Good looks? Contributing to the welfare of others and the advancement of mankind?

But really, Why is Ke$ha famous?

Her mother was a singer/songwriter. According to wikipedia, Miss Ke$ha, (but just plain Kesha at the time) went to two high schools, but dropped out and later earned her GED. She also trespassed onto Prince's ("ahem- the artist formally known as") estate trying to get him to produce something for her. Her demo tape was a song, and the b-side a minute of her rapping and trailing off, to which her agent applauded her "chutzpah."

Admittedly she does try, but it seems she tries to hard. Perhaps modeling herself after Lady Gaga's orginality/uniqueness/weirdism, but it seems Ke$ha comes off as just plain trashy.

Does her monicker, being one word, and using a symbol automatic elevate her to the likes of Cher, Bono, Andre3000, Will-I-Am?

Was she the top "artist" in the talent pool?

At least we can believe in the New American Dream. Apparently anyone can be successful and famous.

Nice hat Ke$ha.

I for one welcome our new computer overlords

Image by charliecurve via Flickr

So the two smartest jeopardy guru's were beaten by IBM's super question answering machine. Not even weird semantics of English and popular culture were able to throw him off.

This guy was able to beat Watson during his train up to compete on TV with Jennings and Rutter.

http://www.fastcompany.com/1726969/how-i-beat-ibms-watson-at-jeopardy-3-times

And this training must have paid off.

While Watson had millions of books in his database, and a sweet mechanical push button device, he also wasn't hampered by emotion. As he played, he didn't have to worried about paying taxes on the million dollar prize for the victor, or being laughed at by his friends for missing those ridiculously easy questions about Jersey Shore.

Don't cry humans.

I also now have to wonder about what this technology will lead to. What if someone decided to use it for evil purposes? What if someone tried to destroy their LSAT's, MCAT's, or SAT's? Good luck trying to sneak all those servers into the test room. But I guess a bluetooth device implanted in your molar and connected through "sweet video camera eye glasses," could make this possible. hmmmm....

seems like a lot of work. I'll just keep reading books.