Duncan, I think you have really gone off the deep end on this catsup vs. salsa debate. Salt and sugar are two things that Americans get too much of in their diets. To argue on one hand that catsup is a healthy food, and then to assert that it is healthy because it provides energy, i.e., sugar, would by the same argument make it perfectly acceptable to serve Snicker's bars to school children as the protein in their meal, because mixed up in the chocolate and caramel there are some peanuts!
Of course, IBD is one of the most conservative publications I have ever read. They obviously don't care one whit whether the majority of America's children are healthy, and show that by their callous disregard for facts. My catsup is like Penni's, incidentally--much less nutritious than the one IBD claims to have analyzed. Since mine is organic and contains only natural ingredients, it is very difficult to believe that there is any which is much more beneficial to health.
Why is it that the right wing seems to lie and twist the truth so much? Yesterday I saw Senator Ashcroft assert with a semi-straight face that the fact that 80% of the prisoners in a jail near him were incarcerated for nonviolent drug offenses meant that our drug policies were really effective. This is a mind set which I find really repugnant. I mean great, let's take parents away from their children, house and feed them for years at government expense, teach them all the tricks of really violent criminals in prison, give them a felony record so they will most likely NEVER really be able to start over legitimately, take them out of the tax base, and say that everything is great!
Here is a column from our Sunday paper about California's Republican candidate for governor, Dan Lungren, and the dubious sources he used to assert that crime did not increase during the Great Depression. Sounds a little like IBD and the catsup caper:
sfgate.com |
