October 26, 2010

Tuesday 101026

Rest Day


Enlarge image

Jeff Liddle, Grand Canyon.

"Heather Bergeron at the CrossFit-USAW Open", CrossFit Journal preview video [wmv] [mov]

"Rope Climb - Russian Wrap" with Kim and Adrian Bozman video [wmv] [mov]

Event 4 at the Team Rogue Vs. Team Again Faster Tahoe Throwdown - video [wmv] [mov]

Johann Strauss II, "Die Fledermaus".

Robert Frost - Two Tramps In Mud Time.

"How Obama Thinks" by Dinesh D'Souza, Forbes.

Post thoughts to comments.

Posted by lauren at October 26, 2010 5:00 PM

woo rest day ! i feel a new pr coming on......

Comment #1 - Posted by: BL at October 25, 2010 5:04 PM

Anybody got some chocolate milk?

Comment #2 - Posted by: CTU at October 25, 2010 5:06 PM

Love CrossFit but hate the conservative politics.

Comment #3 - Posted by: ion at October 25, 2010 5:16 PM

I go to crossfit for fitness not politics

Comment #4 - Posted by: Dres at October 25, 2010 5:22 PM

It's simple, just start and pay for a fantastic web site and blog, increase 100's of thousands of people's work capacity and you can post whatever topics you like. Post a link...

Comment #5 - Posted by: ARoden at October 25, 2010 5:24 PM

One of the things that I love most about CrossFit is its political neutrality. I can workout with my friends and it doesn't matter what any of use believe because we are all there to workout and support one another. While the Forbes article is interesting and I understand that the person who puts together these posts has the right to post whatever they wish, it would great if these kinds of politically motivated articles could remain off this website. I have appreciated the mainsite for long time in its efforts to expose its readers to culture through music, poetry, literature, etc. (I am a classical musician myself.) All I'm trying to say is that, especially in the midst of November election fever, it is nice to have one place to go where you don't have to put up with politics.

Comment #6 - Posted by: Rachel at October 25, 2010 5:24 PM

Please leave the politics off the mainsite, it's not what we come to this site for AT ALL.

Comment #7 - Posted by: Dave A. at October 25, 2010 5:31 PM

Amen on the politics comments!

Also, I think Heather Bergeron is a great athlete.I admire her ability, her work ethic and her accomplishments.But I'm growing weary of seeing her on every single post. Can we see some up-and-coming athletes? Some new faces?

Comment #8 - Posted by: anneke marvin at October 25, 2010 5:32 PM

To the people who say the CF mainsite can post whatever it wants: Very true. But CF is also a brand, and when you say "I Crossfit," people may think that you associate yourself with every part of that brand, ideology included. Which is why when people at the gym ask me what I'm doing, I say "I like to mix it up" and leave it at that.

Comment #9 - Posted by: Andrew at October 25, 2010 5:34 PM

You have the option to choose not to read the articles.

Comment #10 - Posted by: Clint at October 25, 2010 5:35 PM

To Heather B:

Your determination, grit, work ethic, and sheer tenacious audacity you bring to CrossFit and the pursuit of excellence for both yourself and the community gives inspiration to us all.

Thank you.

Comment #11 - Posted by: james.patrick [M/48/66"/135] at October 25, 2010 5:36 PM

If this were Reddit, I would upvote #10...

Comment #12 - Posted by: Adam at October 25, 2010 5:37 PM

I had a question about post nutrition...

I typically have 1.5 to 2 scoops of whey protein with 1.5 to 2 cups of milk and I throw a bunch of fruit in the blender. A lot of times I throw so much fruit in there and have it around 7:30 or 8:00 so it will be a sub. for my dinner. Is that a good way to go about it? Should I try make the shake lighter and eat dinner as well? What would you suggest eating for dinner if I do (more protein, carbs, etc..)? I'm looking to put on about 10 lbs of muscle. Well, I would like to at least.

Thanks for any help.

Comment #13 - Posted by: FinnishCraig 5'9"/23/m/150 at October 25, 2010 5:37 PM

In the free market, you have the freedom to choose, with your time or money, whether you wish to engage in the readership of the articles of certain people, i.e. Dinesh D'Souza. If you feel that it is not worth your time, then you have the freedom to not read that article.

Likewise, CrossFit has the freedom to post whatever articles they feel will stimulate some discussion on the comments. You have the freedom to partake in the back and forth.

Of course, if you are a liberal, you are ignorant of basic economics so all of this comes as a shock to you. Freedom is an amazing concept, and in all your liberal, "open-minded" thought, you have failed to grasp that.

Comment #14 - Posted by: Paul Szoldra at October 25, 2010 5:48 PM

@ 13 FinnishCraig:

I would take out some of the fruit and eat dinner. Fruit is fine in small amounts, but you can definitely eat too much since it has so much sugar.

Eat meat and veggies. And I hope that milk you are using is whole milk. Don't worry about saturated fat. You need it for energy and testosterone. It is good for you.

Comment #15 - Posted by: Nick at October 25, 2010 5:48 PM

I am very close to finding another source for fitness info after that article from Forbes. I have loved Crossfit for over two years now, but using it as a vehicle to promote such a blatant partisan article is not in line with the inclusiveness fostered by Crossfit practitioners. Shame on whoever's idea that was.

Comment #16 - Posted by: Daniel at October 25, 2010 5:48 PM

#16 so quit whining and post a rebuttal.

Comment #17 - Posted by: aroden at October 25, 2010 5:53 PM

To #14,

But it's not stimulating discussion - not worthwhile discussion anyway. It's just gotten people to ask not to post such articles from what I've read so far.

Comment #18 - Posted by: Bien at October 25, 2010 5:55 PM


Exactly my point my friend. Exactly my point.

Comment #19 - Posted by: Paul Szoldra at October 25, 2010 5:58 PM

To those who say we have the "freedom" to not read the article, of course we do! You are only pointing out the obvious. I read the whole article hoping that there was some nugget of though-provoking purpose to it. Unfortunately, there wasn't. Only propaganda. I was rooting for CrossFit, but it failed. Bummer, dudes.

Comment #20 - Posted by: Rachel at October 25, 2010 6:01 PM

Heather! You are awesome!!

Comment #21 - Posted by: Pat Sherwood at October 25, 2010 6:02 PM

In correction of #20, I meant "thought" not "though". Whoops! Sorry!

Also, Heather totally rocks!

Comment #22 - Posted by: Rachel at October 25, 2010 6:06 PM

If you read the whole article, please let me know the factual mistakes. Obviously it's an opinion piece, but maybe someone has a different explanations to offer for some of the administrations policy decisions?

Comment #23 - Posted by: ARoden at October 25, 2010 6:06 PM

An article called "How G.W. Bush Thinks" would have been short indeed...

Comment #24 - Posted by: Matt S at October 25, 2010 6:06 PM

I've always appreciated the neutrality of political views on this website. Political arguments from either side are irritating.

I hope this isn't a sign of things to come from this site.

Comment #25 - Posted by: chris at October 25, 2010 6:06 PM

I love crossfit, but please keep the politics off the mainsite.

Comment #26 - Posted by: chad at October 25, 2010 6:07 PM

I'll never understand how people, at the very first hint of something that may go against their thought process become instantly defensive, almost like they've been offended, like "how dare you", come on now. This article would stimulate some good discussion if people were secure enough to read something they may not agree with, think it over and come back with oposing view points, or if you don't care enough about it to put that time in, just don't read the article. Hilarious.

Comment #27 - Posted by: Dani at October 25, 2010 6:11 PM

Sorry you liberal Obama lovers can't figure things out and then whine when crossfit wants to post an article about it. Not everything is puppy dogs and ice cream. He's running up astronomical debt, weakening our boarders, killing privatized business/small business, weakening our military...I could go on and on, and none of these things are opinions. They are fact.

If you don't like it, leave. Freedom of speech is just that; its not "freedom of speech unless it offends a liberal".

Comment #28 - Posted by: The dude at October 25, 2010 6:13 PM

Heather is awesome and Obama is awful. Loving the face-off videos from Tahoe. Keep em coming!

Comment #29 - Posted by: Steve Liberati at October 25, 2010 6:13 PM

Against logic there is no armor like ignorance.

Laurence J. Peter
US educator & writer (1919 - 1988)

Read the article. Make your cogent reply. I'll be happy if the facts aren't facts but I've seen them all unfold. The country is messed up by both the conservatives and the liberals. I love that the people are waking up and taking an interest. Let's return to virtue, honesty, responsibility and a people who hold their government accountable.

Comment #30 - Posted by: Thatcher M/43/5'10"/200 at October 25, 2010 6:14 PM

Am I the only one that thinks Dave Lipson's range of motion is appauling? I noticed it in the total video, and then in the 225#DL/135#OHS WOD, and now in event 4 at Tahoe. I'm not sure if he had a previous injury, or any other physical limitation, but I wouldn't call any of his squats good depth.

Comment #31 - Posted by: Eric at October 25, 2010 6:19 PM

The Tahoe Throwdown video's are awesome! Keep them coming thank you

Comment #32 - Posted by: J-F/20/5'9/160 at October 25, 2010 6:21 PM

To the Conservatives:
Mr. Dinesh D'Souza's article has been decried as factually incorrect the moment it appeared in Forbes. Google it and stop defending a piece just because it's anti-Obama. That's just whack.

To the Liberals:
The main site does have a right to post factually incorrect, politically leaning pieces if they want. You'd have a better argument against it at the CrossFit Journal site b/c you pay for it. But not here. And, they do tend to lie independent - more so Libertarian.

To everyone: Stop bitching. If we all found common ground maybe we wouldn't have let this country fall into the state it has over the last four administrations: Democratic and Republican.

Comment #33 - Posted by: CrossFitRonin at October 25, 2010 6:27 PM

To Matt S. cause obama is such a good president? your comment sounds like its coming from the typical teenager who doesn't know anything about politics but just thinks it's cool to vote for obama cause it's the "hip" thing to do. instead obama passes a health care bill that he doesn't even know all the topics it covers. So instead of focusing on more important topics like the war in Iraq, or strengthening our borders and helping out other problems that should be fixed, he sends america into a spiraling debt. Obama compared to bush hasn't had anything to deal with. all of the stuff bush had to deal with from 9/11 to the invasion in Iraq has been handled well for the most part. Obviously he made some mistakes but who doesn't. So next time you try to get into a political conversation know your stuff. Cause if i knew any better you are a 18 year old teenager in a rebellious period in your life voting for Obama cause you want "change."

Comment #34 - Posted by: steve at October 25, 2010 6:28 PM

D'Souza is a vibrant, insightful and well researched conservative voice. I enjoy reading him.

That CF posts this on their site doesn't bother me. CF has, as a fundamental (is that a dangerous word?) principle the reliance on self-determination to accomplish extravagant, daunting tasks (at high intensity and with minimal rest). In short, it encourages people to look at the odds, spit in their face, and achieve. It is a democratic (not Democratic) principle that we strive to overcome mediocrity and labor to preserve individual freedom. That's capitalism. That's America. That's not our President.

I don't mind political commentary or opinion. If not for religion and politics (and CF and art and literature and guns) the rest is of secondary interest. Do you really care about baseball (especially since it's the Rangers and the Giants)?

I hope that wasn't too parenthetical.

Comment #35 - Posted by: RecOnifer at October 25, 2010 6:29 PM

AWESOME article! Anyone who disputes it should NOT be CrossFitting.

Comment #36 - Posted by: Mr. Joshua at October 25, 2010 6:30 PM

Instead of immediately dismissing this article as some kind of political propaganda, read it objectively. It is not just one mans opinion or some kind of conservative conspiracy, it is rooted in facts. It will provide some insight into some of the baffling decisions made by this administration

Comment #37 - Posted by: Brett at October 25, 2010 6:30 PM

Wow! I'm surprised that trashy propaganda like that forbes article would be posted on what I thought was a classy site.
Posting intelligent articles from both sides of the political spectrum side by side would be a good way to stimulate discourse. Of course, the reason Republicans have resorted to mudslinging and name calling is because their economic ideology is an abject failure. For the past 30 years voodoo economics has been the practice and it's gotten us nowhere as a society. All this critique of Obama and he's pretty much been blocked from making any real progressive changes.

Comment #38 - Posted by: G$ at October 25, 2010 6:33 PM

I'm not sure where all this flack regarding the conservative-leaning news posts are coming from.

CrossFit follows the same pattern of fairness every Rest Day: one beautifully composed piece of music and a well-written short story or poem for Liberals who can think for themselves (and are therefore immune to Conservative propaganda posts) and appreciate the arts. And on the other spectrum, a news article of mindnumbing stupidity is posted for the Republicans who have to be reminded how to think.

It's fair for both Conservatives and Liberals so please stop complaining about the posts.

Comment #39 - Posted by: Stephen at October 25, 2010 6:35 PM

too much rest these days... i will catch up on some OHS practice tomorrow i guess...

Comment #40 - Posted by: jkel at October 25, 2010 6:37 PM

gonna change gears here since we're voicing our opinions. And that's all this is. . .

The class and professionalism of many of the so- called crossfit elite is appalling. In these videos it seems many can't string two words together without dropping the F-bomb. I'm sorry for all the "crossfit kids" out there who may be looking up to these people.
Shame on them, and shame on HQ for posting this smut. Repeatedly.

To all the elite who do manage to keep their heads above the morass (Spealler, Miranda, and others), good on you!

Comment #41 - Posted by: Dan at October 25, 2010 6:46 PM

why is being anti-colonial bad? Maybe people need to study American history a little closer. Start with the American Revolution.

Comment #42 - Posted by: Lisa at October 25, 2010 6:48 PM

To say that I am disappointed to see the dinesh d'souza drivel featured on the CF website is an understatement. His "ideas" are pure bigotry and hatred masked as intellectual analysis. You really should be ashamed of yourselves. Seriously.

Comment #43 - Posted by: Greg prestemon at October 25, 2010 6:57 PM

I just saw this clown Dinesh D'Souza debating with Jonathan Alter on C-span last night. It was really entertaining. Clearly D'Souza is intelligent but the stuff he says has no proof and is all merely theoretical. The very last paragraph of the article is simply disgusting to me. Well, I would posit that as long as crossfit also posts liberal and other viewpoints as well then I guess posting this is fine. But better to just leave politics out of it and focus on the good stuff. Because talking about politics tends to divide rather than unite, and this site is all about uniting to get work done and kick some butt. Looking forward to tomorrow's wod/better links.

Comment #44 - Posted by: Mehrban at October 25, 2010 7:06 PM

Enjoyed the article and love the videos. I miss that big blue lake! And to those negative comments about the article, complain all you want, just don't be ignorant and close-minded. You don't have to read the article, but if you do, try to post a well-informed rebuttal, or don't post anything at all. I am pretty sure that crossfit isn't going to stop posting controversial articles because it might ruin your workout experience.

Comment #45 - Posted by: ebards1 at October 25, 2010 7:08 PM

Saw a great T-shirt which applies here:
"Stop bitching and start a revolution".
I usually don't read the articles unless the feedback by others in these posts compel me to do so. In this instance, I will definitely pass. I'm here for WODS, vids, CF info, and feedback by others. That's it. I'm surprised so many people follow the links to some off site and then come back here and whine about the link. Duh! Who gives a rip?

Comment #46 - Posted by: Sid m36/5'9/165 at October 25, 2010 7:10 PM

Why read some controversial article when you can dream about rafting in Hermit in the Grand Canyon. I love the pic, don't care about the opinions of some crappy magazine article. Cafe con leche is what we call it on the Arkansas.

Comment #47 - Posted by: Lucky at October 25, 2010 7:14 PM

Have not heard one dispute of the facts in this article, just general statements like "pure bigotry" or "mudslinging", ok, offer an example....those kinds of statements come when people feel backed into a corner and have nothing else to say so they just try and deflect. Its just an article people, stop acting so wounded.

@Daniel #16, are you being serious? I hope not because i got a laugh out of it.

Comment #48 - Posted by: Dani at October 25, 2010 7:17 PM

Here's a great idea if you do not like the articles posted on the main site......don't read them. you don't have to. really, no one is forcing you to. look at the wod's, the cool videos, then go away. if you quit crossfit because you disagree with the articles posted you have issues that go beyond your political views.

Comment #49 - Posted by: Joe at October 25, 2010 7:18 PM

how does the old WWII bomber pilot's saying go? "you know you're over the target when you start taking the heaviest flak"

koudos to CF main site for using what they've created with their own grit to promote what they believe is right

I'm shocked it took 42 posts before someone on the left played the "bigot card"

Comment #50 - Posted by: bronze whaler at October 25, 2010 7:24 PM

Got to mad to finish the Obama article; but I'm glad there was a great poem to take me back to a good place. There's a lot to be said for loving work. Keep it up!

Comment #51 - Posted by: Micah at October 25, 2010 7:35 PM


use e.g. instead of i.e.

also, just because someone is a 'liberal' doesn't mean they lack an understanding of 'basic' economics. look at clinton, a liberal (in both political views and morals) and he had the country in the black (by this i mean a decrease in the debt to GDP ratio) for the first time since '81 (carter was president then and he was a democrat). all his predecessors (republicans Reagan and Bush, which i guess could be called 'conservatives' remember 'Reaganomics?') increased this ratio (for those of you who are bad at math, thats bad)

that type of statement is right up there with ones like 'crossfit is only good for strength training' and 'ponies are baby unicorns'

the exponential rise in whining in the mainsite comments is frustrating. #39 hit it on the head.

Comment #52 - Posted by: Kamu Lacerdo at October 25, 2010 7:36 PM

The funny this is that you'll all be back tomorrow...

It's also funny that this country has (d)evolved into a "democracy of shame", i.e. "shame on you" for having that opinion because it's not mine, or to support my shaming of you, here's a single iota of contrary opinion or smoke-and-mirrors disguised as "evidence". Note that this goes for all sides.

Crossfit is very diverse, including HQ. Ultimately, it is what YOU make it to be.

Frankly, I could really care less what the mainsite posts. I filter through it then go about my business. No feathers ruffled...ever, even if it read like HuffPo or Drudge. I would still be proud to say that I Crossfit because, to me, it is what I make it. Why don't you show outsiders what it is to you?

Comment #53 - Posted by: Clinton Canaday 24/6'3"/220 at October 25, 2010 7:42 PM

To clarify on my earlier post, I'm not mad the article was put on the main site- it can just be depressing thinking about where our leaders are leading this country

Comment #54 - Posted by: Micah at October 25, 2010 7:42 PM

this saved me a lot of typing. Forbes is just a mouthpiece where the ultra rich sell their ideas to the uneducated and/or unempathetic to convince them to vote taxes, tariffs, and worker protection laws down in the name of Liberty, Freedom and my favorite "supply side economics." If supply side worked all I would have to do is build a million widgets and they would sell themselves. Government spending and government intrusiveness both domestic and abroad have expanded under the last 3 republican presidents more so than under the last two democratic ones. Are all politicians crooked? pretty much. Is Obama doing a bang up job as President? Not really, but that doesn't mean I want to read about it on CrossFit. Heres the article from The Economist:


My primary complaint is this: CrossFit is my favorite source for exercise info and motivation but just like I wont eat at a restaurant that is playing Glenn Beck I will not browse a website that is blatantly partisan.

Comment #55 - Posted by: daniel at October 25, 2010 7:44 PM

not gonna read the article, don't care. This is how it works, the media builds someone up, and then slowly starts chipping away at them to pull them back down, the only surprise is its taken this long. Anyone who gets built up like that eventually gets torn back down.

great videos guys, should color grade them tho ...

Comment #56 - Posted by: Kent at October 25, 2010 7:47 PM

Who cares about the politics, post more of the Tahoe Throwdown videos. I was waiting all day for that.

Comment #57 - Posted by: Adam at October 25, 2010 7:49 PM

Heather - you rock!

Dinesh D'Souza - awesome!

Rogue v. AgainFaster - very cool!

Thanks CF main site for keeping it interesting.

Comment #58 - Posted by: Brian at October 25, 2010 7:49 PM

This conservative politics bother me more and more. What is this? I love Crossfit, but I'm starting to think my money is going toward some conservative agenda. And it's not just today's post, it's the constant tribute videos to soldiers currently at war without any mention of how badly many of us would rather have them home.

I'm just wondering how far this right-wing intensity goes. Should I not bring my gay friends to a Crossfit event? Should I make sure I cut my hair as not to seem like a hippie? If this continues, they're going to lose support from a lot of people, myself included.

Comment #59 - Posted by: Ryan at October 25, 2010 7:50 PM

Rob is an absolute animal. If his language ever gets foul it is only a product of how intense a competitor he is and how much he demands of himself. He is a humble and respectful family guy. Its always an honor to get to go head to head with him, and I am a lucky guy in that respect.
Thanks for being a great motivator and brother to me Rob,

Comment #60 - Posted by: Dave Lipson at October 25, 2010 7:53 PM

It's pretty embarrassing to go on a website like CrossFit, which has a very high proportion of really intelligent followers, and find a bunch of "mature" adults finger pointing, name calling, and stereotyping complete strangers. I'm sure that's what's best for our society as well as our political system. The second sentence may or may not be sarcasm.

Comment #61 - Posted by: I just turned 18 at October 25, 2010 7:54 PM

#16 Daniel, Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Comment #62 - Posted by: John T at October 25, 2010 7:55 PM

“Obama supports the Ground Zero mosque because to him 9/11 is the event that unleashed the American bogey and pushed us into Iraq and Afghanistan”. I may have missed it but did anyone find any concrete support for this claim?

Additionally the mosque is not being built at “ground zero”, labeling it as such is deceptive. You wouldn’t say you visited “ground zero” if you in fact had really only come within a few blocks of the former World Trade Center. The Mosque is NEAR ground zero.

The President has a law degree from Columbia University. He taught Constitutional Law at Columbia for more than 10 years. He is well acquainted with the Constitution, and through his non-unique interpretation of our Constitution has evidently arrived at the conclusion that religious freedom is a virtue, demanding the utmost respect and reverence in this country. Ockham’s Razor. What’s requires the fewest assumptions? This hypothesis? Or the hypothesis that the President’s view upon the Construction of this Mosque, are founding in anti-imperialism? That his sympathy lies with those who oppose the imperialist tendencies of the very nation of which he is commander in chief?

"I sat at my father's grave and spoke to him through Africa's red soil."

Inferring from this that Obama “communes with his father and receives his father's spirit” and “takes on his father's struggle” and “decides that where Obama Sr. failed, he will succeed” cannot rationally be concluded. D’Souza is reading into a rather benign quote which could reasonably interpreted as nothing more than a son’s longing for his father, a brief feeling of connectedness between him and the idea of his father. This is nothing out of the ordinary as far as gravesite experiences go. We visit graves to preserve the memory of fallen loved ones, to resurrect them in our minds for a brief time and commune with them in a sense, albeit a quite spiritual sense.

Comment #63 - Posted by: KC at October 25, 2010 7:56 PM

What a disgusting, inaccurate heap of steaming psychobabble!

I hoped, as I clicked on that article, that Crossfit might surprise me. I hope the article would be interesting, balanced, or insightful. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

I sent a friend to the main site today, recommending the video of Heather B. and her adorable daughter. I refuse to endorse this site any longer - I don't want anyone to think for a minute that I agree with this right-wing crap.

Comment #64 - Posted by: mcronin at October 25, 2010 8:05 PM

Well said, Dave. Rob, it's always a pleasure to workout with you. Keep the hunger alive.
The Tahoe series is brilliant :)

Comment #65 - Posted by: denise thomas at October 25, 2010 8:06 PM

What a freakin' joke. It's not like there's a banner on the main page that supports one side or the other of the political aisle. Get over it. Many of you are just way to sensitive about this. I don't seem to read any bitchin' when the main site posts a classical music piece. I mean, since when do most people equate classical music to hard core, kick butt workouts?!?!? Do I listen to it? No. I click on the next link. If the title that is hyperlinked doesn't seem like something you'd like THEN DON'T CLICK ON IT!!!! Criminy! Pathetic.

Comment #66 - Posted by: Craig in NC at October 25, 2010 8:07 PM

This article is beyond retarded. Obama gets his politics from his father who he barely knew?

Did the 70 million Americans who shared his views and elected him to the office of president also have kenyan fathers who left them at a young age?

Thought provoking articles are one thing; usually Crossfit does a great job of finding interesting pieces of prose, poetry, music or current affairs.

This, however, is just mindless drivel, and it feeds on the worst kind of ignorant and racist understandings of the world.

This is no different from articles 5 years ago that claimed Bush was a war criminal and should be put in jail.

The fact that we're even discussing it is a sad commentary on the state of the American political discourse.

Comment #67 - Posted by: dan at October 25, 2010 8:11 PM

What I learned about Obama’s actions as President from the article:

- He has made a speech in which he said he would like American’s to rely less on oil
- He thinks banks need to be regulated by the government, not just bailed out by the tax payers when they get in trouble
- He thinks more economic stimulus is wise
- He would like to end Bush’s tax cuts for the rich
- He has made a speech in which he stated that Muslims have the right to build a place of worship and a community centre on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances
- He (or his underlings) wrote a letter stating that it was (1) best for Megrahi to stay imprisoned in Scotland, (2) worse for Megrahi to be released on compassionate grounds with restrictions in Scotland, and (3) worst for Megrahi to be sent back to Libya
- As reported by one of underlings, he would like NASA to “find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math, and engineering.“

Another thing the author of the article would like me to learn is that Obama’s actions, when viewed with a proper understanding of his father (helpfully identified by the author as a “Luo tribesman“) and of Obama's relationship to his father, Obama’s actions can be properly construed as being motivated by the ’noble cause’ of anti-colonialism. For instance, the author tells us, the regulation of investment banks and healthcare insurance sectors by Obama’s administration is not socialist (’once they ‹these sectors› submitted to federal oversight he was happy to do business with them’), it is ’anti-colonial’. president.

I think the inference made by the author is incorrect - if not incorrect then at the least “unlikely to be true“. You see, when I add these actions of Obama (and his underlings) up, I get a pragmatic “liberal“. Admittedly, the NASA thing is very strange, ill conceived, comical-even if Obama really said the things attributed to him.

I wonder if the author of the article (whose embarrassingly crude innuendo suggests he is not just critical of Obama but actually anti-Obama) is concerned that there may be a great many Americans who are pragmatically liberal, and that these people may vote for Obama and his party (again), and that the author therefore would like pragmatic liberals to believe Obama is neither pragmatic nor liberal, but ’anti-colonial’.

Another thing I've learned from the article is that Morris' should have cast Teddy Roosevelt as an 'anti-colonial' trust-breaker in his(what I thought wrongly to be exquisite)biography 'Theodore Rex.

Comment #68 - Posted by: Prolix at October 25, 2010 8:18 PM

CF Crew - as a recent entrant to the world of CrossFit, I have a tremendous sense of gratitude for the CF community of athletes that have shown what is possible with discipline, courage, and support. The D'Souza article - err...well...my humble recommendation is that we all take a deep breath and focus on what holds us together and not what divides us. The occasional article, piece of music, or quote of whatever stripe...as long as it is not wholly objectionable...I suggest we stay frosty and move on.

Comment #69 - Posted by: Walt at October 25, 2010 8:20 PM

dsouza, Just like the tea baggers, is brought to you by the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation and paid to protect the economic interests of "selfless libertarians" like the Koch Brothers and Phil Anschutz. He espouses "intelligent design." On racism, he notes "Americans treated their slaves as property, that is to say, fairly well." The abuses at Abu Ghraib are clearly "the values of debauched liberalism run amok." There is little the fanatical man writes that makes sense, much less "believed" or capable of being refuted. Can you refute a man who writes "our president is trapped in his father's time machine ... our country today is governed by a ghost" anymore than you could deny to Joseph Smith that Archangel Marconi gave him an invisible book that only he could read with a jewel that compelled his philandering? Better starting point for the Forbes article, is whether it contains any true facts or any valuable commentary at all. I am sure Glen Beck, Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh will vouch for his accuracy. Surely there are better respected libertarian commentators available than he? Locke, Mencke, Goethe? Where have they all gone when CrossFit needs them?!

Comment #70 - Posted by: KyleNYC at October 25, 2010 8:24 PM

What do you thinks Obama's Fran time is?

Comment #71 - Posted by: Mr. Joshua at October 25, 2010 8:25 PM

I recall many articles of a more liberal slant posted on previous WODs and rest days. I don't recall anyone complaining about those posts. Yes, the article is focused on the shortcomings of the Obama presidency. Were there not a plethora of anti-Bush articles and editorials when he was in office? It is the nature of Americans, and our duty as free citizens, to question and challenge our elected representatives and leaders. An article exploring the failings and contradictions of a sitting president is not without precedent. The article was also in good taste and did not slander Mr. Obama or call his character into question, it pointed out some of his actions and decisions and called into question his motives.

Comment #72 - Posted by: Logan M at October 25, 2010 8:26 PM

You whiners crack me up. I love it when my neolib friends post political thoughts and articles; then I get to explain to them why they are in error and put them in possession of the truth. But it never seems to work the other way around. All we get in return are ad hominem attacks or complaints about how offended they are. I can't tell you the last time any libs I know actually wanted to discuss facts or policy.

Comment #73 - Posted by: John Seiler at October 25, 2010 8:27 PM

where was event 3 at Tahoe

Comment #74 - Posted by: e5fyrman at October 25, 2010 8:34 PM

I'm okay with the D'Souza article if CF posted an opposing view point along with it. I really respect the CF concept for workouts, but not for the political view points. Nearly everyone on the "right" side of the political conversation easily forgets or dis-regards the rights they have as individuals because of historical liberal achievements. ps....remember Ronald Reagan raised taxes. I doubt he could pass a tea party test now.

Comment #75 - Posted by: Ted at October 25, 2010 8:35 PM

Thats one of our Level I trainers taking on the Colorado River. He had a great trip with his son and was in great shape for rowing from CrossFit! Good job, Jeff!

Comment #76 - Posted by: CrossFit Estes Park at October 25, 2010 8:43 PM

Please note- The richest tax brackets are currently contributing at one of the lowest percentages in US history- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States , http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php

Comment #77 - Posted by: Katie at October 25, 2010 8:45 PM

Enjoyed the Forbes piece. I look for to a little bit of everything on the rest day, athlete profile, a little music, literature and political perspective. Flexing the Mental muscle.

Comment #78 - Posted by: mannyc at October 25, 2010 9:11 PM

I'm a political conservative and there are a lot of decent criticisms that could be leveled against him, but that article was pretty weak.

Comment #79 - Posted by: djp at October 25, 2010 9:25 PM

Also in the picture, under that wall of water is Jeff's son Max. He is 6'3" 215 lbs and a CrossFitter as well! Thats a lot of water!

Comment #80 - Posted by: CrossFit Estes Park at October 25, 2010 9:36 PM

CrossFit.com is an international site and the program is international - they do certifications all over the world. I'm a Canadian teaching English in South Korea. Even living here I feel like I'm always reading about American politics in the news.

I'm disappointed to see it on the CrossFit main site, even if I didn't click on it.

Comment #81 - Posted by: JohnB at October 25, 2010 9:41 PM

For those complaining about injecting political or religious discussion into this website, may I ask,

What could be more important topics to discuss?

To engage in discussions about politics or ecomomics is to sharpen your own views and/or persuade another as to how we can best live among eachother.

To discuss religion (or a less emotionally charged word: "Worldview") is to seek truth at an even more ultimate level.

I get the feeling that you don't want to hear or read about political points of view because you are either too lazy to know and defend your position, or you recognize the fragility of it.

Comment #82 - Posted by: Jimmer at October 25, 2010 9:42 PM

nice hat

Comment #83 - Posted by: nathan 31/5'9"/160lbs at October 25, 2010 9:44 PM

"With Obama's backing, the U.S. Export-Import Bank offered $2 billion in loans and guarantees to Brazil's state-owned oil company Petrobras to finance exploration in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro--not so the oil ends up in the U.S. He is funding Brazilian exploration so that the oil can stay in Brazil"

Or are we (since by He, the author certainly means taxpayers) investing in a lucrative exploration project that will pay us back exponentially?

"Obama's foreign policy is no less strange. He supports a $100 million mosque scheduled to be built near the site where terrorists in the name of Islam brought down the World Trade Center. Obama's rationale, that "our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable," seems utterly irrelevant to the issue of why the proposed Cordoba House should be constructed at Ground Zero."

Now this REALLY puzzles me. What does a building project in New York, NY have anything to do with "foreign" policy? The author lost a lot of his credibility in this statement. I am a conservative and disagree with a lot of the Presidents views; however, I agree with President Obama 100% when he says our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable. Period. No matter what religion.

"Colonialism today is a dead issue. No one cares about it except the man in the White House."

This statement proved the naivety of the author to me. I almost hope it is a joke. Does he pay attention to anything going on in the War on Terrorism? What is the number one battle cry of Al' Qaeda? Iran? The Taliban? ...... Oh yeah, their motive to fight (or just be a menace in Iran's case) is to get rid of the Imperialists! They view us as such. Even though it is untrue.

Great post crossfit... Healthy debate is the first step to progress. Now if only there were less ignorant readers on here.....

Comment #84 - Posted by: Derrick at October 25, 2010 9:44 PM

Also, there seems to be some confusion about the role and power of the US President.

The president has a lot of power, but he is quite limited by the congress.

In order to get things done the two must cooperate. The success or failure of the US economy can never be completely blamed on or credited to the president alone.

Remember the first 2 years of Clinton were pretty poor. It was not until the conservative take over of congress in '94 that things turned around and started getting better.

Likewise, through tax cuts and FED policies Bush and a moderate congress under the republicans had helped the country rebound from the tech crash in 2000-2002. The economy was doing pretty well until the democrats took over congress in 2007.

Obama and the democrats took power in this country not because people believed in their big government ideas, but because they were fed up with Bush and the republicans voting more and more like liberals. In the years since 1994 they had forgotteb their contract with America.

Comment #85 - Posted by: Jimmer at October 25, 2010 9:55 PM

Loving the Tahoe videos. Keep them coming. Don't care so much for the politics, but only because I am here for all things fitness. I proudly rock my crossffit shirt for what it says about the the type of fitness I partake in - not because I subscribe to everything posted on this site. I can appreciate the cultural pieces posted on rest days and I could care less about HQ's political motivation or viewpoints. I'm not saying they shouldn't have posted the article, but by the same token I don't read CNN for their viewpoints on fitness so take it with a grain of salt. It's a charged opinion piece, written in such a way to provoke an emotional response - clearly it has.

Comment #86 - Posted by: Brone at October 25, 2010 10:00 PM

anybody know obama's deadlift PR?

Comment #87 - Posted by: michael baker at October 25, 2010 10:01 PM

Definitely disappointed to see slanted journalism included on the main site. Will the evangelical coaches start asking us for 10% tithing now?

Comment #88 - Posted by: Kaye at October 25, 2010 10:04 PM

I concur with the comments about leaving politics off the CF website.

Two things that no one will ever agree on are politics and religion.

I am interested in learning how to get my body better. If I wanted to read information about politics I will read Fox, MSNBC, Forbes, Time or any other news source.

Please keep the politics off Crossfit because we have Democratics, Independents, Republicans and TeaBaggers all crossfitting and promoting one view over the other is just plain ignorant.

Comment #89 - Posted by: Jim S. at October 25, 2010 10:05 PM

This is funny. It sounds more like Facebook than Crossfit.

Comment #90 - Posted by: Amykr F/38/5'9"/145 at October 25, 2010 10:12 PM

How about this article. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/opinion/24rich.html?_r=2&src=me&ref=general

Why don't we talk about how a recent poll showed that only 8% of Americans know that Obama gave a tax cut to 95% of Americans.

It is not that I don't like Conservatives I just don't like ignorant propoganda.

So, CF stick to stuff that you know and that is working out and stay away from politics and leave that to the pundits. You only serve to tarnish the Crossfit brand by advocating for a conservative or liberal viewpoint.

I for people who say that we are just scared of debating the issues, this is not the forum to debate politics it is the forum to learn more about fitness.

Comment #91 - Posted by: Jim S. at October 25, 2010 10:15 PM

Jimmer, you have your economic facts wrong. The contract with America did nothing to help the economy. The budget was balanced because Clinton raised taxes. The economy was on the rebound in 92 and took off because of the tech boom.

Under Bush the economy never "did well." We had a credit bubble and a Keynsian stimulus in the form of tax cuts and deficit spending. The expansion between 2002-2007 was the weakest in history with per capita GDP growing at 1.63%.

Comment #92 - Posted by: Sam at October 25, 2010 10:22 PM

I have not read the article, but I can tell you this. Obama's overhead squats are horrible. No range of motion. And his Fran time is appalling.

Comment #93 - Posted by: Tim at October 25, 2010 10:23 PM

From one who has spent almost a lifetime in service, I started when I was 17, Im 41 now, Its refreshing anytime I look somewhere and there is a call to wake up and smell the coffee. Ive been serving in Afghanistan since 2005. So Im in touch with the pulse and feelings of a lot of our military. You either wake up now or you wake up later when you need my brothers and sisters I serve with more than ever. Sadly the damage done to this country in the last two years now, can probably never be truly fixed. Thanks crossfit for allowing information and not media hype and smoking mirrors to be displayed.

Comment #94 - Posted by: Rome at October 25, 2010 10:30 PM

Rome, what damage has been done to the country? Protecting shareholders and consumers? Turning the economy around? The economy was crashing at an annulized rate of 6% in Q1 2009 and now it growing according to every economic indicator, even the unemployment number. Unemployment increased for 15 months after the 2001 recession and it leveled off 4 months after the 2007 recession ended in 2009.

Check your facts.

Comment #95 - Posted by: Leslie at October 25, 2010 10:48 PM

You can talk economics all day long. One side says this the other says that. Here in the real world. My friends are losing their business...still, People are still losing their homes. Soldiers risking their lives often make so little they could qualify for food stamps. The Health Care bill....wait till that really sinks in. Its obvious in your bubble things are well. Im happy for you. Out here in the scary forest the recession is way from over. Obama and crew put a band aid on a sunken chest wound and people love him for it. I know I know its all Bush's fault. That should have been the campaign slogan..WE CAN...Blame all this on Bush. Please Thank you though you have put a smile on my face this morning. 1030 am Afghanistan time.

Comment #96 - Posted by: Rome at October 25, 2010 11:08 PM

Rome, sound like you don't want to give credit to Obama for what he has done to turn things around. That's fine but take a look at the economic indicators when you get a chance. A blog called calculated risk publishes data every day. You can see there are plenty of problems but things have vastly improved thanks to the actions of the Fed and the Obama administration.

Wait until the health care bill sinks in? Have you read the Republicans pledge to America? When you have a chance look at page 29. They are adopting most of what is in the health care bill except for the mandates. So it must not be as bad as they claim.

Comment #97 - Posted by: Leslie at October 25, 2010 11:35 PM

Since when is it a sin to talk about politics? There is probably a reason why some don't want you to discuss politics. If you don't try to hash it out yourself, then you'll have to take the "facts" presented by the person writing the article with their particular slant/agenda. This happens whether it's far right, far left, anywhere in between or just plain crazy. At least be willing to listen/read what the other side has to say. If it's trash, and motivates you to do your own research to disprove it, then wow! How horrible is that?

One of the things I find very sad is so many people confronted with an idea that differs from their own, immediately resort to name calling, mud slinging, and personal attacks as their first defense. I guess with all the political commercials on right now, we have been trained that this is the way to get your point across. (You are all stupid, support cop killers, and give guns to babies if you don't agree with me!) That doesn't defend your position. Although, it seems, it is a way to get elected.

I suggest to you that not discussing political viewpoints different than your own is lazy. (Akin to sitting on the couch, and saying "Can't you experts give me a pill to get me those six-pack abs?") We, as Crossfitters, should know by now to get better, it takes hard, sometimes painful work. In the words of Mike Myers, "Talk among yourselves. I'll give you a topic."

Comment #98 - Posted by: jeffc at October 25, 2010 11:58 PM

The 94 comments and counting are proof that putting any political stuff on this site is a bad idea. I'm glad I don't read the Obama piece or any other political articles when they show up here.

I am constantly pitching Crossfit to friends and family. How can I do that confidently when the comments section looks like the most reactionary nonsense on Huffingtonpost or Brietbart?

Please spare me the brick-brained bromide about how crossfit has a "right" to post whatever they want. No one is saying that the people who run this site should be thrown in a gulag or Sing Sing for posting an article from Forbes.

I understand that the site is free and that the people who put it together are professionals and I truly appreciate that. Crossfit and this site have improved my life.

However, I feel that it is important to give feedback about things that hurt the Crossfit brand. This political screeching puts off people whom the site could potentially benefit.

Thanks for reading.

Comment #99 - Posted by: Michael Kelly at October 26, 2010 12:23 AM

Found the article VERY interesting! Thanks for posting.

Comment #100 - Posted by: Aden Stiles at October 26, 2010 12:48 AM

Found the article VERY interesting. Thanks for posting!

Comment #101 - Posted by: Aden at October 26, 2010 12:49 AM

I am a self identified conservative and critic of President Obama.


I did find it somewhat strange that this political article, which is entirely out of place, would appear on this site. Regardless of my opinion on it, I think that while the website creators are free to do what they want, it is an inappropriate forum for such matters. I don't come here for politics, news and weather reports.

The reason I feel it is inappropriate is because people have such strong opinions that it distracts from why we're all actually here, to workout and share ideas about crossfit.

Comment #102 - Posted by: Pete at October 26, 2010 12:50 AM


Comment #103 - Posted by: Pete at October 26, 2010 12:52 AM

Personally, I was glad to see the Forbes article. I don't usually post comments, don't have the time or the interest to do so.... but with all the negative posts today I simply had to say to whoever decided to share the Forbes article, "Keep Up The Good WOD!"

Comment #104 - Posted by: MisterCleanHead at October 26, 2010 1:21 AM

Interesting article.

I have not read rest day comments since 2005.

The commentors have changed but the commentary has not.

I probably won't read Rest Day comments again until 2015.

Comment #105 - Posted by: John H at October 26, 2010 1:48 AM

Crossfit is the most wonderful thing - however, it'd be nice to leave politics out of the website. The conservative politics is a disappointment to me but even if I'd read progressive liberal links here: it has no place on your otherwise wonderful website.

Comment #106 - Posted by: Ingrid Straeter at October 26, 2010 4:14 AM

LOVE the political stuff! Dudes...why are you so offended by anything anti-OBAMA? reminds me of NPR...wow...we need to get real, and get rid of this president before it is too late.

Comment #107 - Posted by: runnerfirst at October 26, 2010 4:16 AM

Dave--Thanks for the comments above. I watched the video and was appauled by my own language. I want to apologize to the CF community for dropping "F" bombs unecessarily.

Comment #108 - Posted by: Rob Orlando at October 26, 2010 4:30 AM

Jimmer, #80 above, awesome comment...what is more important??? we work out, crossfit, whatever to improve our lives. This administration is doing all that it can, as fast as it can, to undermine all of us. ALL of us, even the steadfast O-supporters. WAKE up .

Comment #109 - Posted by: runnerfirst at October 26, 2010 4:59 AM

On a serious note,

Why hasn't HQ announced Reebok buying our beloved brand? Sounds ridiculous, right?

Comment #110 - Posted by: DeepSquat at October 26, 2010 5:26 AM

I love that people have so time on their hands, too bad the time spent writing ridiculous posts whining and complaining about stuff wasnt used to DO something...wish i had that time...

Comment #111 - Posted by: Snyder at October 26, 2010 5:34 AM

@ #69:

I doubt it would be very good since he is a heavy cigarette smoker- one of the many facts about him that were brushed under the carpet

Comment #112 - Posted by: bronze whaler at October 26, 2010 5:52 AM

I love how this community (typically) is supportive of each other.

I have no issue with the political articles being posted.

I don't have a problem with discussion, even when heated; in fact, I love a passionate debate.

I don't even have a problem with an article leaning this way or that (centrist/moderate here).

I just think it's silly, childish, sad and rather insulting to this community that people will post comments with no particular purpose other than to name call and ridicule an entire group of people that they choose to label one particular party or another. Why can't we just debate? Or not read the rest day articles and comments if we can't be civil?

Comment #113 - Posted by: hound at October 26, 2010 5:57 AM

CF doesn't make anyone read the articles, so if you don't like the theme don't read it. as for it being "Conservative" that is not true. It is far more of a Libertarian bent. There is a huge difference. as for concerns about the "brand" I would say it's up to the powers that be to promote their brand. You despise that angle you are free to start your own brand.

Comment #114 - Posted by: MattS at October 26, 2010 6:18 AM

I came here a while back looking for some camaraderie borne of shared suffering in the pursuit of a common goal: fire-breathing, kick-ass fitness. Much to my dismay, I eventually found that such camaraderie barely exists if at all. Reading posts from bingo and others I get the impression this wasn't always the case, but alas, I came too late.

Today, the mainsite comments section (mostly on rest days, mind you) seems to be used as a vehicle to ramrod political and religious ideologies down our collective throats. There is no intelligent discourse, just a reinforcement of preconceived beliefs. While I happen to be a liberal, atheist, and ardent believer in evolution and global climate change, under no circumstance would I want articles espousing my own personal beliefs to start showing up here on the mainsite. Why? Because my beliefs are irrelevant to my reason for coming here in the first place: fire-breathing, kick-ass fitness.

Posting divisive ideological material is certainly CrossFit HQ's prerogative. They own and operate the site and I would not begrudge them that. However, I truly feel we would be much stronger as a community and better advocates of CrossFit if we could put aside our various conflicting beliefs and focus on what we all DO have in common: a shared loved for the best fitness program out there.

Just my $0.02.

Comment #115 - Posted by: toddamn at October 26, 2010 6:21 AM

My Thoughts (As opposed to insults or 'shame' throwing)
I thought the article was an interesting read. I have read some of our President's words in his book "Dreams from my Father" The article "How Obama thinks" directly quotes the book. Now I understand quotes should be taken in context i.e. quotes from the bible. So the authors use of direct quotes are opinion at best. For those of you who oppose the article what are your thoughts on the article quotes from the book penned by Obama? What about his father's "dream" he took hold of before leaving his fathers grave? If you care not to comment what are your thought on the "other" two rest day articles? Thank you Crossfit for helping us exercise the mind. You know when we exercise the body we need resistance. Perhaps the same is true when exercising the mind, looks like some don't like exercising the mind, I for one look forward to it!

Comment #116 - Posted by: Fernando at October 26, 2010 7:06 AM

man up Russ.

Comment #117 - Posted by: runnerfirst at October 26, 2010 7:08 AM


Comment #118 - Posted by: PETE at October 26, 2010 7:10 AM

I don't particularly like Obama, but I think that posting links to political comments damages the site and the program. As some have mentioned, the creator has complete right to post whatever he or she wants, but I trully believe that using this site as a platform for political and social debate would potentially destroy the community that crossfit.com has created.

Comment #119 - Posted by: Francisco at October 26, 2010 7:31 AM

Talk about dissapointing..how about Rich walking out on the competition, and having to be called back in by an opposite team member. I'm really unimpressed with his behavior. Not who I want to see representing CrossFit at such a high level, or Again Faster for that matter.

Comment #120 - Posted by: Kate at October 26, 2010 7:42 AM

Although I may agree, I think it's a bad idea to start with adding in politics to CF. Disappointed.

Comment #121 - Posted by: CA at October 26, 2010 7:44 AM

Anyone who has been in the game long enough knows Glassman enjoys stirring the pot and geting us thinking...

Loving the Tahoe videos!!

Thanks for the Level 1 Cert at GSX this weekend!! Great crew!

Comment #122 - Posted by: Andrea Cross at October 26, 2010 7:52 AM

"Dreams FROM my Father" not "Dreams OF my Father"
Wow! That article was a huge eye opener. Makes total sense.Explains many of the decisions made by Obama that dont make sense to the average person.Anyone commenting here that have not read the article should go back and read it.You will be amazed at how much this article explains.
Most of the negative comments about the article are not dealing will the facts in the article. For example Obama loaning money to Brazil for oil exploration just to name one. I dont see how any rational thinking person can argue with the facts presented by D'Souza.Again, anyone who has not read this , please go back and read the article you may be surprised what you learn.If you are not into politics just think of it as a new wod for your brain. A way to increase your brain capacity as opposed to your work capacity. Thank you CrossFit for posting this article!

Comment #123 - Posted by: Manuel at October 26, 2010 8:02 AM

I have been reading every article that has been posted on the rest days - and enjoyed every single one of them. Most of the articles covered a variety of topics from science to entrepreneurship and presented a reader with interesting and useful information. My favorites include a discussion on lack of evidence that salt is harmful and a chapter from Micheal Lewis's "Big Short". But this article from Forbes was a total waste of time - basically the author was promoting his book that is completely based on SPECULATIONS and an author's opinion. The message conveyed by the article (and I suspect by the whole book) can be reduced to four words: "Like father like son". And I have to admit, that Dinesh D'Souza does an excellent job switching back and forth from Obama Jr. to Obama Sr so at some point I lost a track of whose ideas the author is talking about. I am sure there are more interesting and fact-based articles criticizing Obama out there, This article is just sub-par with strong hint of Glenn Beck's propagandistic style

Comment #124 - Posted by: Repto M/40/5'11''/225 at October 26, 2010 8:16 AM

This is a sad, sad day for the CrossFit "Rest Day" articles. And no, I'm not a crazy liberal Obama lover. This article by D'Souza is absolute trash. It is NOT fact, by any means, merely " a fever dream of paranoia and irrationality."

That quote is from a fantastic evisceration of the article (written by a conservative, no less). Read it here: http://secularright.org/SR/wordpress/?p=4815

So my complaints can be summarized as follows:
1.) In general, it's nice when the Rest Day articles shy away from politics. Not always, but mostly we should leave politics out.
2.) When the main site operators do post a reading about politics, make it a legitimate analysis. Not this travesty of ignorance, ad homeniem accusation, and latent bigotry.

As a conservative/libertarian, I know you can find MUCH, MUCH better.

Comment #125 - Posted by: Andrew at October 26, 2010 8:31 AM

Cudos to CF for putting up unpopular articles. Perhaps next time they will post the Economist article (or one a similar ideological slant) alluded to in Comment 57.

To everyone that has an opinion about this article being awesome/trash: Read/watch the news and ideas that force you out of your comfort zone. Exclusively reading/watching liberal or conservative sources is like doing Fran or Murph everyday. Like a new CF workout, it may make you puke, but you'll be better because of it.

Frankly, more interesting than this article is the acerbic response from many of those who replied on this thread. We (not to include the International CFers, sorry) are all Americans and regardless of our political differences we should be able to engage in something akin to a civilized debate. Words and phrases like "teabagger"; "Obama is a Commie"; and "anyone who disputes it should NOT be CrossFitting" are juvenile and unproductive. This thread is better than the response page to a youtube video.

At the end of the day, the US is not going to be brought down by burgeoning debt, unsecured boarders, or repeal of health care. It will be brought down by the hollowing out of the political center and the inability of people to put aside their individual political feelings and work toward a common goal.

Comment #126 - Posted by: Andrew Wrenn at October 26, 2010 8:39 AM

Love the Forbes article, but I have to agree with Andrew's post above. Well articulated my friend.

Comment #127 - Posted by: Brandon at October 26, 2010 9:13 AM

Why is there so little discussion about the politics of not opening the hips up totally at the top of a squat?

Comment #128 - Posted by: Scot McKinnon at October 26, 2010 9:16 AM

Wake up all of YOU!



Men are controlled and manipulated through divide, conquer and constant deception. You have been programmed since you were all born and never had the option to believe or think without a manipulative cloud involved. These are all tied into culture, religion, law, traditions etc. The sad part is most of us are preprogrammed to not think on a conscious level. No different than a muslim, christian or catholic going against each other. Anyone who can see that Bush and Obama are puppets are merely blind. Yeah all politicians are puppets and you never see the true manipulators that control everything including your emotions (which are man made) In other words, if Wal-Mart was this country, The elite and true power holders would be the executives and the president of the united states would be a bag boy in comparison.

Comment #129 - Posted by: Enlightment at October 26, 2010 9:30 AM

Obama would never do crossfit...much to dangerous but I bet he crushes the leg extension and the pec deck machines. Besides most crossfit wods are done for time which would mean you can beat someone else's time which could scar someone for life and that wouldn't be fair. Now if someone could just figure out a way to redistribute some of the fitness of the higher capacity people to the lower capacity less fit people then I think he would totally be into that. Maybe if we could just tax the fitter people at a higher rate then we could use that increased tax revenue to create government bureaucracies with the sole purpose of promoting fitness to the underfit.Too many people in this country have an unfair fitness advantage over other lessfit people.For example Graham Holmberg is way to fit. He is so fit that he has extra fitness that should be passed around to others. Nobody deserves to be that fit and he obviously got that way unfairly by taking advantage of other less fit people.If we could just tax him and other superfit people like Kristan Clever and Speal at say 99 percent of their income, then we could set up government run crossfit boxes in low fit areas. There would be no fee to train at these locations so unfit people would flock to these sites and and we could end this inequality of fitness once and for all.BTW no one will be forced to quit their current box, give up your current trainer and join the free government run free boxes with free trainers. Government ran crossfit or" ObamaFit" will in no way effect the old capitalist style boxes and remember if you have a trainer now you can keep that current trainer.

Comment #130 - Posted by: Victor at October 26, 2010 9:54 AM

haha nice one victor

Comment #131 - Posted by: danlau at October 26, 2010 10:05 AM

Why it is so many "liberals" want to tune out/shut down/ stamp out the market place of free-ideas?

Comment #132 - Posted by: Bruce at October 26, 2010 10:07 AM

I don't disagree with the Forbes article entirely, but I think it's really not an appropriate article for the main site. I think some of the juvenile responses to it however are even less appropriate. Imagine if tomorrow the main site puts up some Huffington Post article bashing the GOP or how much we are in this mess because of the last administration. How are the reactions going to be then? My two cents is that since this is a fitness site, that the articles should have something to do with fitness? I've never really been embarrassed before to be associated with crossfit. I usually tell people that ask me how I've gotten into shape, "check out the website". But I don't think that I want to be associated with that article, or with the comments above. I think my default response it just going to be that I go to 24 hour or something. It's much less embarrassing than some of the comments above.

Comment #133 - Posted by: Shaw at October 26, 2010 10:09 AM

Really disappointed you decided to attack the President on your fitness site. I got some news for you, folks, opinion isn't journalism, and an opinionated column by Dinesh D'Souza has never contained news. (Don't believe me? Take a look at his past column titles. He attacks the left for the entertainment of the right, similar to Keith Olberman. Its all feed for the sheep.)

Comment #134 - Posted by: JMD 32/184/6'1" at October 26, 2010 10:30 AM

Bruce, because they know better bro.Free-ideas only when they say so.

Comment #135 - Posted by: Bob at October 26, 2010 10:35 AM

Isn't it ironic that CrossFit has always had a conservative slant and yet attracts so many whining, sniveling liberal d-bags.

Comment #136 - Posted by: Mike D. at October 26, 2010 11:17 AM


Thank you for severing our country and giving all of us the freedom of speech that we have today and our other rights. I really appreciate it more than I can put into words. It is because of people like you that we have to freedom to argue on websites like this.

Comment #137 - Posted by: Celeste_intelligence analyst at October 26, 2010 11:17 AM


Comment #138 - Posted by: PETE at October 26, 2010 11:23 AM

I just celebrated my one-year CrossFit anniversary last night and I was excited to check back with the site today. Very disappointed to see the D'Souza article posted. I come to CrossFit for inspiration and a break from pettiness.

One place I hope to find respite from partisanship is here. Let's keep the politics out of CrossFit.

Comment #139 - Posted by: David at October 26, 2010 11:35 AM

500M Row & 30 65 lb. Clean & Jerk (C&J- 3:45) with SCBA Mask on. Just got it & I'm trying easy stuff with it on to get used to wearing it while doing functional movements.

Comment #140 - Posted by: The Anaconda at October 26, 2010 11:39 AM

#142 You have been with us for a year and today was the day you figured out that others who crossfit may have a different political opinion than yours? LOL

Comment #141 - Posted by: Bob at October 26, 2010 11:40 AM

I didn't include my political opinion in my post, Bob.

I usually ignore the political back-and-forth on this message board, but it exhausted me today. I don't believe this is the right place for it. Let's honor our troops, work hard and get healthy together. That is what I believe CrossFit is all about.

Comment #142 - Posted by: David at October 26, 2010 11:46 AM

Dave and Rob throw around heavy weight like nothing...amazing strength!! Great explanation on the rope climb too, very helpful to those trying to learn the best technique for themselves.

Comment #143 - Posted by: Eric - CrossFit North County at October 26, 2010 12:18 PM

101024 Not Rx'ed

deadlifts 1-31 @ 210 lbs, 32-45 @ 225 lbs
overhead squats 115 lbs


Comment #144 - Posted by: Quinn McCutchen M/41/150/5'10" at October 26, 2010 12:39 PM

The problem I have with the article is its use of word play and specific events, which may or may not be in line with Obama's philosophy, to prove points. I forget the name of the term describing the tactic but for example: "So what's driving his hostility to private enterprise," "look to his roots." Then they go on to describe his travels as anti business... This is absurd. It's also extremely hard to formulate an argument against because you can't confront any of the data to disprove the hypothesis. It's a highschool debate tactic and the cornerstone of most politics.

"Thanks to him the era of big government is back" ... Hmm, wasn't it a republican that announced the "New Deal" ? How exactly did Bush shrink government? He lowered taxes, not government, which is why we have a lot of debt. This article is a smattering of misinformation.

Comment #145 - Posted by: dt at October 26, 2010 12:43 PM

While crossfit is a great philosophy to make a well rounded athlete... it seems to do nothing to make it's adherents mentally well rounded. Is it that painful when you realize not everyone thinks like you or shares you view, that you feel so compelled to react with such vehmence? To everyone over reacting on this comment thread ask your self as to why.

Comment #146 - Posted by: Carl Los at October 26, 2010 12:48 PM

Who is this "Obama" you all speak of? Never heard of him.


The State of Hawaii Birth Certificate Office

Comment #147 - Posted by: Jonathan at October 26, 2010 12:51 PM

The crossfit comment section is slowly becoming a place for "everyone deserves a trophy" kind of sissies. Its a website, they can post whatever they want to. If it is a stance that crossfit takes...great...if not, take it in from whatever side you are on and move on. Do y'all whine like this during your WODS?

Comment #148 - Posted by: Catch at October 26, 2010 1:10 PM

The crossfit comment section is slowly becoming a place for "everyone deserves a trophy" kind of sissies. Its a website, they can post whatever they want to. If it is a stance that crossfit takes...great...if not, take it in from whatever side you are on and move on. Do y'all whine like this during your WODS?

Comment #149 - Posted by: Catch at October 26, 2010 1:10 PM

@ #122, Nothing wrong with Rich. He worked and earned his lead. This is a head to head competition. I don't think he was really leaving the field for good. And if he was, then it was strategy, because no one knows what other events he may be needed for. For all the Lipson haters out there, be careful, he may give up an up close of his 'imperfect form' by overhead squatting you into a body slam. :)

Comment #150 - Posted by: cjxfit at October 26, 2010 1:15 PM


Comment #151 - Posted by: PETE at October 26, 2010 1:19 PM

#152 Catch - Ditto

Comment #152 - Posted by: Tim at October 26, 2010 1:24 PM

C&J/Cindy WOD, details there.

Comment #153 - Posted by: bingo at October 26, 2010 1:30 PM

No rest

Ran 400 meter sprints on Elliptical
Resistance level at top notch
8 sprints 1:23 to 1:25
Heart rate above 170

Clear mind/lungs on fire.
That's why I am here.

Train hard

Laura f/48/5'7/155

Comment #154 - Posted by: power-girl at October 26, 2010 1:42 PM

I must say, I was suprised to see an article with a tone of political of persuasiveness on the website. It has no place on the crossfit website. As a black man, I am delighted to see a president that is somewhat reflective of myself but I am both critical and supportive of Obama, as anyone else would be, and many other politicians for that matter. There are some things I agree with and some I don't. I consider myself fiscally conservative and socally liberal. So you can call me independent, democrat, or republican. I think what I think. I just don't want to think about politics when I come to crossfit.

Comment #155 - Posted by: Norvan at October 26, 2010 2:05 PM

Please keep the politics off the site, I really enjoy telling a lot of people about this site. With this kind of garbage opinion article, it really brings us all down.

Comment #156 - Posted by: Al at October 26, 2010 2:13 PM

@ Jim S. #91
"Please keep the politics off Crossfit because we have Democratics, Independents, Republicans and TeaBaggers all crossfitting and promoting one view over the other is just plain ignorant."

Anytime you take a stance on ANYTHING you are promoting one view over another. For example, you are promoting the idea that they should not post one view over another, thus promoting your viewpoint of it over their view point or anyone who doesn't agree with you. You are calling them ignorant using an argument that by your own definition is ignorant. Think about it.

Comment #157 - Posted by: Dani at October 26, 2010 2:22 PM

@ #153
Lipson Couldnt catch me lol

@ #151 - Agree!!

Is it just me or did the Tahoe Throwdown vids skip number 3?
Oh well thanks for the uploads anyway they are so sweet!!!

Comment #158 - Posted by: RyanShanksNZ at October 26, 2010 2:25 PM


Comment #159 - Posted by: Terri at October 26, 2010 2:27 PM

What an article. I didn't/wouldn't vote for President Obama, and I disagree with some of his policies, but to shoehorn a few facts and statements into the author's argument regarding the President's anitcolonialist sentiments is a huge stretch, one which I don't think he comes anywhere close to convincing this reader. Firstly, President Obama is not the 'last anticolonialist'. Pretty much every African is an anticolonialist and conversely, I doubt very many people would request that the word 'colonialist' be used to describe them. What are those people? Fence sitter colonialists? Secondly, several of the facts/policies the author shoehorns into a narrative about anti colonialism have real pragmatic reasons that explain them just as well. Take the Brazil example, perhaps the President of the U.S. has an interest in promoting Brazil remaining friendly to his interests rather than moving towards Venezuala. The Nasa comment could easily make sense as part of a strategic communications plan to reach out to the muslim world, of which a large portion ranges from distrust/suspicion to hatred. Pick your poll. Lastly, the author ignores the elephant in the room ie the continuation of much of President Bush's security policies: the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan continue, Guantanomo is open, none of patriot act is repealed, military operations have expanded in Pakistan and other places. How are any of these policies examples of someone who is guided by an anticolonialist 'ghost'. The article to me lacked any substance and was just another writer making noise and playing on people's fear. Pretty weak man, pretty weak.

Comment #160 - Posted by: B-Mo M/33/6'/190 at October 26, 2010 2:30 PM

#166. facts clearly don't matter to this crowd. Many of them state that it's their freedom to speak how they want being its a free country and all. I've found by reading most of these pro-article posts (i.e Obama's a Comme<-spelled just like it was posted, the menthol comment, which I guess was meant to be funny cause Obama is black? and the guy that pretended to be the State of Hawaii Birth Certificate Office, I honestly didn't think there were any birthers left, but then again, there are people that still believe we walked with Dinosaurs, so I shouldn't be surprised) that facts are clearly eluding some of these people. Let's not forget that the bank bailouts and AIG bailouts were done by the last administration, that the cost of the 2 wars we are currently fighting has cost this country more than 50 economic stimuli, and that Obama has given 95% of Americans a tax BREAK, yet only 8% are aware of it. So once again, I think the article was in bad taste, and has no business on the main site.

Comment #161 - Posted by: Shaw at October 26, 2010 2:50 PM

I've been doing Crossfit on and off for over 2 years now. It is hugely puzzling to me that a large number of posters today are not aware of the history and nature of "Rest Day" on this site.

In short, despite a recent hiatus when we were treated to music, poetry and more neutral articles, the posted articles have generally contended as follows:.

1. Global warming is a hoax / bad science.
2. "Big Government" is bad. Libertarianism rocks.
3. The global war on terror is absoluetly vital and suspected terrorists need to be treated as threats, with no need for kid gloves. Pandering to them is a mug's game.

Anyone carrying out any kind of review of the last 3 years' worth of CF posted articles can see this.

I have argued on here in the past against those particular points of view and against the notion of directing everyone to just one side of a given debate on a fitness website, posing this as some sort of "mental fitness".

So I'm not shocked at all by this article. But I am shocked that so few here seem to have been around for very long at all? And that so many are so recently arrived? Do a huge number of people stop crossfitting after a year? Or do they stop coming to the site on Rest Day? Or do they stop posting? It's as if the last 3 years hasn't happened for most people here. Why is that?

Comment #162 - Posted by: J1 at October 26, 2010 3:17 PM

yeah, politics just raises our HR in an unhealthy way. I'd prefer the WOD and workout comments to trash talk from either side.
Nice picture of Hermit though! Good to see Grand Canyon tuff guys gracing the stage every so often!

Comment #163 - Posted by: j c at October 26, 2010 3:29 PM

Liberal: "I do half squats with a very conservative weight because I don't want to offend anyone better then me."

Conservative: "I do full range of motion squats with a very liberal amount of weight because I can!"

Comment #164 - Posted by: American Tea Party at October 26, 2010 3:34 PM

If we're to discuss politics, let's at least have the catalyst be something better than this guy's barely coherent rant. I know there are smart conservatives out there, and this guy's not one of them.

Comment #165 - Posted by: jeo at October 26, 2010 3:36 PM

Dear Shaw (#165),

If you have any information as to the whereabouts of Mr. Obama's birth certificate, please notify this office immediately.

Thank you,

The State of Hawaii Birth Certificate Office

Comment #166 - Posted by: Jonathan at October 26, 2010 4:16 PM

Dear Hawaii. Really? You crazies are still out there? Ok, so it wasn't enough that he released it during his campaign, or the newspaper announcement from the 60's, or the states governor that saw it, or even the McCain campaign who called you people ridiculous, how about the fact that the supreme court through out the lawsuit and refused to hear it on any merit what so ever. Oh, and the fact that it was thrown out by those liberal justices Kennedy and Scalia (both appointed by Reagan) should suffice that it exists, and it's been seen by enough people to fulfill the fact that he is a legit citizen. If thy still doesn't suffice, try factcheck.org. Oh, and dinosaurs never existed with people. But you probably won't believe that either.

Comment #167 - Posted by: Shaw at October 26, 2010 4:48 PM

what article ? I just DID WORK

Comment #168 - Posted by: BL at October 26, 2010 4:57 PM

Ridiculously one-sided article (enjoyed reading & laughing at it all the same). The dude that wrote it isn't a freethinker. Always amazes me how clearly intelligent people will often compromise their intellect because of an apparent need to conform to doctrine.

‎"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking..." - Tolstoy

Comment #169 - Posted by: gazaloo/m/45/165lbs/5'9" at October 26, 2010 5:00 PM

Dear Shaw (#172),

Thank you for your comments to our office. We will consider these in our search for his birth certificate. Do you know where the certificate currently is right now? We are still looking for it.

Please take the bait again as we enjoy your heated posts that show your emotional attachment to Mr. Obama.

And as far as people who don't believe like you regarding dinosaurs, why the hate man? We at this office don't understand your vitriolic message when we believe we can all just agree to disagree when we don't agree.

Thank you again and please fax or email this office a copy of that birth certificate when you come across it.

God bless, oops, we mean Obama bless,

The State of Hawaii Birth Certificate Office

Comment #170 - Posted by: Jonathan at October 26, 2010 5:52 PM

References to "strumpets" and "sissies" on the same rest day - the comments page is channeling General Patton.

Comment #171 - Posted by: Prolix at October 26, 2010 5:54 PM

I am a conservative. I read the article. Whether I agree with it or not is irrelevant. I am also polar opposite of liberal politics. If this article had been from a liberal perspective, the liberals would have rejoiced....HOWEVER, we should stop the mudslinging and work towards a common goal. We all have one thing in common; CROSSFIT. Crossfit for me is a lifestyle. No government in history has made everyone affected by it happy. No government is perfect. Government should be limited in power. Liberals, republicans, conservatives, democrats alike should work towards an objective together instead of the nay-saying, no-can-do attitude. Crossfit HQ, for those of you that don't know geography, resides deep within the liberal belly of California. We are affected by politics that have run this state into the ground and Crossfit just wanted to share a bit of information. Whether this information was factual or not is based on opinions. Not one political party is perfect, either. I will even criticize conservatives if necessary. Where there are people, there are flaws. Government should be limited in power and people should decide how it operates, not elitists. Remember one basic fundamental; Absolute power corrupts absolutely. I apologize if this article has offended anybody. Sadly, divided we fall.

Comment #172 - Posted by: James Irvin at October 26, 2010 6:20 PM

I was crushed with dissapointment today to check the site and see yet another composer highlighted for rest day. I come to this site for fitness, yet when i come here, sure enough, there's that tiny little blue link. There are so many other types of music, for you to continue to promote one style over the others appals me. I have already started looking elsewhere to find fitness advice because I'm terrified that someone might assume that I like symphony music because I crossfit, I just can't take that chance. This is not an appropriate place for such music (yes, I'm appointing myself authority on what is and what is not appropriate for others to post on their free websites).

Crossfit, please stop posting classical music, I only like Rock, Alternative, and some Rap.

Comment #173 - Posted by: Dani at October 26, 2010 7:11 PM

Dear Shaw (#181),

When will you stop taking the bait? After you see the real certificate? Please post again! We love it!


The State of Hawaii Birth Certificate Office and Creationist Center

Comment #174 - Posted by: Jonathan at October 26, 2010 7:31 PM

Working back into shape while nursing the back and foot injuries.

I did 7 rounds for time of:
10 WallBall Squats (12 lb. ball, 11 foot target)
10 Pullups (Did on gravitron with first 4 at 85 lbs. assistance, last 3 with 100 lbs. assistance)

Time: 14:28.

This was a modified workout from 10/23/10

Comment #175 - Posted by: RJB7 at October 26, 2010 8:42 PM

And how much was the deficit when Obama took office? Try $1.2 Trillion. And the cost of all the Bush years? A rough guess of $11.5 Trillion.


Comment #176 - Posted by: billcorno at October 26, 2010 9:09 PM

Suppose for a fleeting moment that Dinesh D'Souza's facts were all true, and that his psychological gossamer and his deductions were all sound. How would his model for "How Obama Thinks" help us as citizens or as a nation? When the Republicans take-over next week in an unprecedented sweep, how would that knowledge of Obama's thought processes help them formulate a legislative agenda, especially while he still sits as President? How would the objectives of the Tea Party revolution be enhanced? Even looking ahead to 2012, how might D'Souza's psychological profile help end Obama's Presidency? D'Souza writes for entertainment.

On the other hand, analyzing Obama's actions, using terms defined with care, we can develop a highly useful characterization, and one that contradicts D'Souza.

D'Souza says, "Rejecting the socialist formula, Obama has shown no intention to nationalize the investment banks or the health sector." D'Souza may be relying on a conventional definition of socialism that requires government OWNERSHIP of the means of production and distribution. A better definition is that socialism requires only government CONTROL of the means of production and distribution. That is sufficient because the government already has full rights to income and wealth, able to make any citizen a tool of the government. In that light, the financial regulation and health care bills create agencies for the total control of these business sectors. Obama has indeed nationalized them, and through Cap & Trade, he intends a similar nationalization of manufacturing, agriculture, shipping, and anything else that uses energy.

D'Souza says the theory "that Obama is a socialist -- not an out-and-out Marxist" isn't "wrong so much as … inadequate". How is that to be parsed? "Out-and-out" means complete and thoroughgoing. D'Souza gives no hint what element of Marxism is missing from Obama's persona.

Not every socialist is a Marxist, but every Marxist is a socialist. Here's how that happens.

Marxism has many definitions. The Encyclopedia Britannica starts its discussion of the topic by listing about a half-dozen different formulations, then turns to Marx to say that his work doesn't lend itself to much of a definition. These definitions however can be condensed into three simple, societal powers from which Marxism derives its authority to control everything. These are Identity, Governance, and Citizenship.

Identity: Marxism identifies people collectively, as for example by race, wealth, religion, employment, to create unrest by pitting one collective against another, and to garner support through benefits offered to each group – to Balkanize the nation. E.g., black vs. white, rich vs. poor, Muslims vs. Christians vs. atheists, workers vs. management, young vs. old, victims vs. oppressors. In the Western Culture, exemplified by America, the social identity is the individual, with his personal spectrum of needs and aspirations.

Governance: Marxism rules through an oligarchy, a separate, unique class of rule makers. Of course, once Marxism takes over, the oligarchy turns into one-man rule, a dictatorship. Self-government is the method in the American Culture wherein law is federated, determined at each level by a legislative body empowered to act for the people through public debate, administered by an independent body, and enforced by a third independent branch.

Citizenship: Marx called human rights "bourgeois rights", to define citizenship as duty to the State. In America, duty is always voluntary, while individuals enjoy a panoply of rights. America bars government interference in many, enumerated rights -- freedom of the press, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, right to protection under the law, right to own property, right to petition government, rights to patent protection. In addition, Americans have a right to organize, to employ labor, to enter contracts, to compete for business, to take risk, to create personal wealth.

In less than two years in office, and in each of these facets, Obama, the Constitutional teacher, has repeatedly sided with Marxism over Western and American principles. Teamed with Congress, he supplanted self-government by placing two large segments of the economy in the hands of agency bureaucrats with bills that weren't even read, much less debated. He castigates corporations and profit (greed to a Marxist) at every opportunity, even when seeking corporate help. He puts limits on salaries. He short circuited the established bankruptcy process to relieve GM bondholders of their rights of ownership and to reward the UAW.

Obama is holding rallies for blacks, for youth, for women, for Hispanics, for unions. Never for Americans. D'Souza' quotes him as writing, "You must help in your people's struggle. Wake up, black man!" Colonialism? Obama identifies himself as an ant in one of his colonies, the Poster Boy for Affirmative Action, and not as an individual in the freest of societies, not as an American first.

D'Souza wrote an entertaining piece about the vagaries of motivation, but his conclusion was wrong in fact. Obama is a Marxist. His promised Change is a Marxist take-over of America. The Democrat Party is the Marxist Party, and the Republican Party is the overly compromised, wimpy, half Marxist, Bipartisan Party. The Tea Party is nothing if not a popular uprising against Marxism.

The 112th Congress won't be able to fix the massive surge in debt, nor repair the failed financial rating system that brought on the Great Recession. It won't be able to repeal the new agencies brought about by the financial and health care laws, nor even cut government spending very much, all because it won't be able to overcome Obama's veto. If the new Congress allows recovery to take hold, the pent-up inflation will resemble Jimmie Carter's hapless legacy. Congress can stop the Change, but righting the ship will have to wait for the 113th and a different kind of President.

Will the spirit of the 112th be able to survive? That will require this next Congress to keep Identity, Governance, and Citizenship in the foreground. At every opportunity, it must reject the hideous Marxist tenets of Collectivism, Oligarchy, and Duty. It must instead act in furtherance of the Western ideals of Individualism, Self-Government, and Rights.

Comment #177 - Posted by: Jeff "drrocket" G. at October 27, 2010 7:03 AM


Comment #178 - Posted by: PETE at October 27, 2010 8:05 AM

Dr Rocket, did you read the Republicans pledge to America? From page 29:

"Health care should be accessible for all,
regardless of pre-existing conditions or past
illnesses. We will expand state high-risk
pools, reinsurance programs and reduce the
cost of coverage. We will make it illegal for
an insurance company to deny coverage to
someone with prior coverage on the basis of
a pre-existing condition, eliminate annual
and lifetime spending caps, and prevent
insurers from dropping your coverage just
because you get sick."

How is that less of a govt take over of health care?

Do you own shares of stocks? Do you want your share holder rights to be enhanced or are you OK with publicly traded corporations being run for the benefit of senior management?

Comment #179 - Posted by: Jacko at October 27, 2010 10:08 AM

The greatest thing about CrossFit is that it challenges you to be ready for what life throws at you, even if you don't always like it.

Thanks Coach.

Comment #180 - Posted by: T. Hance CFCP at October 27, 2010 11:09 AM

Jacko #184,

You're spot on in both regards. That little bit of more extra-Constitutional health care is a pitiful example from the feckless Bipartisan Party. For that achievement, I nominate John Boehner, Speaker wannabe, as the Poster Boy of old Republicanism.

Astute of you to single out publicly traded corporations, though not to put it on a personal basis. You put your finger on a grave disease of capitalism, invented and perfected by that archcriminal of finance and accounting, Michael Milken. It is now epidemic.

So what is the cure? The left would ban public corporations, or appoint a czar to decide compensation, neither of which is Constitutional either. A vote of the stockholders to determine compensation seems attractive, but that may be too difficult to implement because compensation is so complex and because Boards control the ballots. Maybe someone could design a compensation pool funded exclusively by voluntary stockholder contributions.

The country could use a little dose of Constitutional fundamentalism.

Comment #181 - Posted by: Jeff "drrocket" G. at October 27, 2010 12:15 PM

This site is about changing the way we do fitness right? We break away from the globo gyms and call ourelves infidels. However when we all of sudden talk about politics nothing changes. Its the same old globo gym, with the same old bull from both sides."Move your body, not machines" right?

Comment #182 - Posted by: corey at October 27, 2010 12:34 PM


Comment #183 - Posted by: PETE at October 27, 2010 1:32 PM

PETE #188,

He would be the 3rd.

Comment #184 - Posted by: Jeff "drrocket" G. at October 27, 2010 2:05 PM


Comment #185 - Posted by: PETE at October 27, 2010 2:22 PM

Hey guys and gals, just wondering if anyone here can help me find a good place for CF on/around Ft. Campbell. The local affiliate in the town closed down and all the gyms on post are filled with musclehead's pumping their biceps over and over in between their trips to the bench. Any help would be greatly appreciated.


Comment #186 - Posted by: RNGR LT. at October 27, 2010 2:27 PM

One in the hopper.

Comment #187 - Posted by: Prolix at October 27, 2010 8:30 PM

Jeff D-Rock,

I won’t split hairs over whether a particular suite of policies is “socialist” or “communist” or “Marxist”. I agree the important thing is “control”. But I do not think the important question is whether the government exercises control over an industry or "the economy", but how much control it exercises. I think the government (hereafter I’ll refer to it as the State) exercises control as soon as it recognizes laws (the common law) and passes laws (legislation) pertaining to commerce, finance, banking, labour, health and safety, that it is willing to enforce.

So it seems to me the question we should be asking is not whether Obama is a “Marxist”, but whether Obama seeks to give the State too much control over “the economy” (micro and macro)? I think casting the question in terms of whether Obama is Marxist is disingenuous; it is a throwback to a now defunct opposition: that of the US and the USSR. When the USSR State exercised near total control over its subjects, called itself "communist" and posed a threat to democracy and personal liberty everywhere on earth, and when the US was the greatest defender of personal liberty and democracy on earth, it was understandable (if inaccurate) to characterize all manner of State control (whether in the US, Sweeden or Australia) over the economy as “communist”. Now, however, after the Cold War has ended it behoves us to be more honest with ourselves.

The additional controls the Obama administration now exercise over “the economy” do not mark the revolutionary successes of a Father Karl's fifth column. Some of the additional control (over health care) is part of a long-standing liberal progressive agenda; other portions of the additional control were taken in response to specific historical circumstances (bailout and concomitant controls over the banking and auto industries).

Let us talk sensibly about whether these policy decisions which have resulted in greater State control over the economy are desirable, justified, obsolete, harmful, threatening to personal liberty or unwarranted when balancing liberty and economic security. But please, let us leave behind the outmoded rhetoric of the Cold War.

To use additional State controls to solve collective problems does not equate to siding “with Marxism over Western and American principles.” If I recall, a great many Americans wanted health care reform, and a great many also wanted the State to step into the economy in a big way when the sky was falling in 2008-9 – and the predictions were that the sky was falling: “Obama and the Democrats are creating Depression 2.0. It’ll make the last one look like a picnic” – Post #115 rest-day discussion on March 4, 2009. Obama’s policy direction (if not the details of the policy itself) was supported widely (though by no means unanimously) by the public, by congress, the senate, financial and banking institutions; and governments throughout the world adopted similar policies – i.e., funding businesses that had failed or were near failing, putting the brakes and pressing the gas on the economy in various massive unprecedented ways, thereby assuming a significant new degree of control over “the economy”. Depression 2.0 has not happened, and perhaps it would not have, perhaps the effect of the unprecedented intervention in the economy and resulting accretion of State control was not to heal the wound but to make it bleed slower over more time than it might have, thereby avoiding fatality. But people were scared and the President and the two houses reacted.

Now, punish him if you will at the polls. Or, vote his party out of congress if you liked the policies at the time and thought they were necessary but now think the emergency is over and the threat these policies pose to personal liberty and long-term prosperity is too high to be tolerated for one minute longer. By all means, do these things. But, please, let the boogie man under your toddler’s bed named Karl Marx sleep where he lies, and get on with thinking about America’s challenges as though they are real, and not as points on the arch of 50’s cartoon-story plot.

Comment #188 - Posted by: Prolix at October 27, 2010 9:19 PM

Obama is "doing this" to the country because he promised to do "this" when he ran for office and he's keeping that promise to the best of his ability.

Why did Bush do what he did to the country?

Comment #189 - Posted by: Fiho at October 27, 2010 9:44 PM

The concern I have is people may feel alienated from crossfit after reading that. Maybe not most people that do crossfit. But why alienate people just for the sake of alienating people?

Comment #190 - Posted by: Joe at October 27, 2010 9:56 PM

Truth has the remarkable quality of being indomitable. It simply IS.

The truths upon which this nation were founded upon in the Constitution have been under siege. Power in the hands of man has led itself to tyranny as was predicted by our forefathers.

American was not meant to be sustained in this current manner. I encourage those in power to RTFM (Constitution).

Lord have mercy..thank you for not forsaking us when we have forsaken you.

Comment #191 - Posted by: Nickster at October 27, 2010 11:05 PM

Nickster, what are you talking about? Tyranny? The Constitution is not being followed? I don't see it unless you're talking about Arizona trying to dictate immigration policy to the Feds.

Constitutional law isn't the black letter of the Constitution. The law is determined by how the Supreme Court interprets the document. Based on that interpretation, the law has been followed rather closely by the Feds during the past 2 years. If you can present a argument otherwise backed by Supreme Court precident, please do so. But the "noun verb unconstitutional" criticism of Obama makes a person seem intellectually soft. Be careful.

Comment #192 - Posted by: Curt at October 27, 2010 11:59 PM

Prole, you have the patience of a saint.

Comment #193 - Posted by: J1 at October 28, 2010 3:36 AM


Thanks. However, I fear what may seem to be patience is actually diligent vanity.

Comment #194 - Posted by: Prolix at October 28, 2010 6:09 AM

Nickster - couldn't disagree more about 'truth'. There are few concepts more relative than truth, and to assume that your conception of reality is absolute truth is, in fact, simple vanity.

Comment #195 - Posted by: jeo at October 28, 2010 7:16 AM

truth is if house and senate
are rep. then maybe obama might
stand a chance. remeber clinton
did 8 years because of this.
and things were good back then.

Comment #196 - Posted by: pete at October 28, 2010 7:45 AM

Prolix #194

You seem to be focused on the name, Marxism, instead of its policies and actions. Why is that?

Everyone wanted health care reform. I wanted health care reform, though I refused to claim that we had a "health care system". We had a successful anarchy in spite of government interference. The reform many of us wanted was to get the government to stop restricting the sale of health insurance, stop abetting the legal system that dictated wasteful medical testing and that created the art of law-suit-defensive medicine, to get the FDA to relax its restrictions on experimental drugs, and to shut down the attractive nuisance of health care for illegals.

Obama ran on Change with no explanation of what he had in mind. It didn't matter. He was half-and-half, pretty, and some believed educated and articulate. It was Affirmative Action time. With regard to health care, he and his party had professed support for a single payer system. The public was set against it, and the best advise from the rest of the World was don't do it! The Dems did it anyway, getting it passed as law without mentioning those words or having an explicit section to that effect in the law. The desire for health care reform was universal among those who had given it much thought. In spite of its weakness, we already had the World's best health care, and no one, whether insured or not, was left out if they wanted in. Those under the World's single payer systems came here for their care. Now it is being destroyed. The Federal government had no Constitutional right to enact what it did. In fact, the 10th Amendment should have been a bar against the Health Care Bill. All indications are that we may have to repair the judges before we can fix the economy and restore freedom.

Forget about the name. Where do you side on the left vs. right questions of Collectivism vs. Individualism, Oligarchy vs. a Constitutional Republic, and Duties to the State vs. Rights? We know where Obama stands, and his all-left policy has a collective name you don't like. You can't park it under the bed with the dust bunnies by offsetting a lot of key words in quotation marks.

A lot of people also wanted the Federal government to take action following the Worldwide economic collapse of 2007. I was one. Count me among those who wanted the Feds to prosecute those in the three rating agencies who had caused the collapse by selling phony AA and AAA ratings and then precipitously retracting them, and to punish those who had given and taken bribes to look the other way. We wanted it to rescind the anti-redlining Federal Regulation that obliged lenders to make a certain percentage of bad loans. We wanted it to set federal standards for rating financial instruments, based on published probabilities of default. We wanted it to bail out nothing, and to let bankruptcy proceed for banks, insurance companies, and auto companies. This was no time to invent new procedures.

No one with any economic insight wanted the Democrats to break into the treasury like rioters at the gun store. The notion that Federal spending is a stimulus to the economy is patent nonsense, justified by Lord Maynard Keynes for FDR, who failed at making it work in 1937. If spending had that effect, World War II would have caused a recovery. Post-war US and many other nations today would be immensely wealthy. The only known stimulus is for the government to maximize after tax income to businesses, and to drop most of the regulations, so that they will invest in expansion and new products and services, and to individuals and businesses to maximize discretionary income among consumers.

Governments consume wealth created by capitalism. Government has to get out of the way. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" is a high sounding recipe for uniform poverty, except for the ruling class. If you don't like "Communism" or "Marxism", how about "Venezuelan"? Or "Iranian"?

Recessions and depressions are a continuum of the same thing. The current economic abyss is somewhere between the previous worst recession and the Great Depression. Call it the Great Recession or Depression 2.0, whichever you please so long as we know what you're talking about.

Economists give recession an artificial and arbitrary definition depending on consecutive growth in quarterly GDP. Unfortunately, GDP is measured in dollars and the Obama Administration is flooding the market with dollars. GDP gets no adjustment for inflation because the CPI is languishing, and that is happening because the velocity of money is at a minimum. The nation is sick, and the Obama Administration is holding a match to the thermometer. It is hammering on the speedometer of a runaway train. Fudging GDP doesn't make a recovery. It only fools a small class of left wingers, including their economists and the media.

Depression 2.0 is not over. We won't have recovery until employment returns to "normal" levels, when the safety net of unemployment insurance becomes less a way of life. It won't be over until the recovery unleashes Obama's inflation, meaning his huge increase in the money supply, so it can work its way through the economy, raising prices everywhere. A surge is coming like the one that caused foolish economic activity like empty cities built in the desert and wind farms, that destroyed the Carter Presidency, and that caused the failure of the S&Ls and banks.

In the final analysis, this crisis, like every other crisis, is unique. This one will have a compound effect to destroy the banking system. Capital assets fall in value as the interest rate rises, and the rate will rise as the inflation becomes apparent. This depreciation of assets is a double whammy this time, falling on top of a system already in the dumps for lack of a functioning rating system.

If you want to measure government control, visit your law library and ponder the bookcase of Federal Regulations. These are written by agency bureaucrats, and few have ever been exposed to Congressional debate and enactments. The czars under the Health Care and Financial Reform Bills are now directing a huge expansion in these Regulations. They promise to regulate down to the level of personal lending, and patient-to-physician medical decisions. It is a huge expansion of government, and an unwanted and extra-Constitutional intrusion into American lives. It is socialism a la Marx.

The cure to all this is clear, the path is not. The remedy might involve a nasty over-correction. My recommendation is a bipartisan throw-the-bums-out, followed by a goodly dose of Constitutional Fundamentalism.

Comment #197 - Posted by: Jeff "drrocket" G. at October 28, 2010 8:20 AM

I totally agree will Prolix, if we could just stop using these scary words like "Socialist", "Communist" and "Marxist".They are merely different forms of control, in fact Id like to take it a step further and change the the names of these terms perminently,I mean words and names are so restrictive anyhow and it would help people forget the destructive history of governments who used these policies in the past must faster.I mean they are so 1945. Lets refer to "socialists" from now on as "bunny rabbits". "Communists" will be "puppy dogs" and "kitty cats" sounds much safer than "marxist".
Now then, how can anyone be against "bunny rabbits"? and when someone says Obama is a "kitty cat", well that sounds much better. How about this? More and more people in the United States have a "puppy dog" mentality. That sounds cute and cuddly and not scary in any way. While we're at it you know more people are starting to catch on to this "Progressive" term. "Progressives" always support "bunny rabbit" and "kitty cat" ideas which usually leads to "puppy dog" style governments. So maybe we could change their name to "Liberals". Oops, they already tried that.Didnt work to well.How about "Antihistory" or "Post Rational"? We'll have to work on that one. This term "Depression" has to go as well. That reminds me.You know the other day I was talking to my neighbor who hasnt had electricty for six months about how great the economy was. He tried to tell me he couldnt find a job and that we are headed for a "Depression".I just laughed as I explained to him that the "Great Recession" is over. The economy is growing again.Thanks to Obamas "controls" things are looking up.If the largest factory in our area that shut down this year and the second largest factory that is shutting down next month would have just stayed open a little longer, they would have reaped the huge bennefits of the expiring "Bush tax cuts" in 2011.Thats when things are really going to take off. You talk about economic BOOM baby!Sure the 10 empty houses on our street that are deteriorating into the ground look bad and destroy our home value but you just wait...just wait I told him.Obamas "kitty cat" policies are going to set things in motion.

Comment #198 - Posted by: Victor at October 28, 2010 8:58 AM

Victor #204,

Do you agree with Prolix because you both want to abolish definitions?

Comment #199 - Posted by: Jeff "drrocket" G. at October 28, 2010 9:22 AM


You wrote that Obama is a “half and half” - of what two things are Obama's halves composed?

You also wrote: "Forget about the name. Where do you side on the left vs. right questions of Collectivism vs. Individualism, Oligarchy vs. a Constitutional Republic, and Duties to the State vs. Rights?"

Sometimes collectivism is good, more of the time individualism is good, many times one is the precondition for the other; Constitutional Republicanism is far superior to Oligarchy but Oligarchy may form under free market and statist political systems; duties to the State are necessary, should be limited, and defined through democratic processes subject to the rule of law; rights are the most important repository of principles governing the relationship between the individual and the state, though rights are not "natural" in the sense of being permanent or derived from a place outside of or prior to the social contract - they are changeable in ways similar to duties.

I agree that the current levels of State responsibility for and control over the economy are likely unsustainable, and over the long term are bad for the United States and the majority of citizens. I think a balance needs to be achieved - one in which regulation helps to avoid a repeat of the crash and failures of 2008 as well as a deepening of the recession, but in which greed (pursued legally and productively) is allowed to reap its rewards in the marketplace (I think greed and the desire for personal accumulation, either at the expense of another [legally] or not, is in large part responsible for wealth and progress, as are State guaranteed health care, education, social programs, regulations etc). I don't like bailouts, and think that if a firm asks the tax payers to get it out of trouble the taxpayers should have their representative (regulator) sticking her nose in the firm for some time to make sure it doesn't ask for a bailout again.

I think it is important to ask the open-ended question of: what kind of society do we want? Rather than creating the false opposition (listen up Victor) between Communism/Marxism/Socialism and Freedom. When we ask “what kind of society do we want (much as the founding fathers did) we can end up with a long list of values and institutions (just as the founding fathers did) that we can discuss, fight over, and finally settle on, holding our noses if need be to move forward (just as the founding fathers did).

I think the hurt is a long way from over, but I don't think it is the fault of Obama's economic policies alone, or Bush’s. I think the hurt has been a long time in coming. And, I think the world is far far far more complicated than Marx, Friedman, or the authors of the Federalist Papers could capture in their writings (though I like the latter best). I think we want to use every intellectual tool in the box to deal with the challenges we face as a society and as individuals. I understand the attractiveness of an extreme market-oriented or libertarian view in which the difficulty of discerning which collection of tools should be used suggests that the range of tools should not be limited by the State. However, there are some tools that have proven to be effective that are too large for any individual or firm to employ and that can only be used by the state.

I also welcome the Tea Party insofar as it gets people thinking about the Constitution and things such as “Constitutional Fundamentalism”, inviting discussion about what it might mean to be a “Constitutional Fundamentalist”. I hope both the Jon Stewart snickerheads and the Limbaugh blowhards read up on the Constitution and the history of their nation. They will find very disparate accounts (see Gordon S. Wood and Thomas L. Pangle).

Comment #200 - Posted by: Prolix at October 28, 2010 11:06 AM


By “false opposition between Communism/Marxism/Socialism and freedom” I did not mean that the first three are not in any way limiting of the fourth. I meant that the opposition America now faces is not between Communists/Marxists/Socialists and freedom lovers. The contest now going in the United States is far complex than that.

Comment #201 - Posted by: Prolix at October 28, 2010 11:16 AM

#93 Jim S.

Re: tax cuts and the NYT article. What is your point here? That Obama is great b/c he gives $400 tax cuts? Or that people are unfairly critical of him b/c they didn't realize they got a tax cut?

Most everybody didn't realize it was a tax cut b/c that was how the administration designed it. To encourage everyday folks to keep "consuming" - remember, this is part of the Stimulus Package, after all.

So - ignorant or not - your post smacks of propaganda just the same...

Comment #202 - Posted by: Mel/37m/5'10"/175 at October 28, 2010 12:55 PM

"The notion that Federal spending is a stimulus to the economy is patent nonsense, justified by Lord Maynard Keynes for FDR, who failed at making it work in 1937. If spending had that effect, World War II would have caused a recovery."

When the economy is in a liquidity trap, fiscal stimulus is the most effective way to turn the economy around. Cutting taxes for business doesn't help when there are there is no profit and no taxes.

Comment #203 - Posted by: Jerry at October 28, 2010 3:55 PM

"When the economy is in a liquidity trap, fiscal stimulus is the most effective way to turn the economy around."

Maybe in fantasy land but in real life
this governments "fiscal stimulus" is effectively producing stagnation which will then produce stagflation.

Comment #204 - Posted by: Victor at October 28, 2010 4:59 PM

Prole, you ask what kind of society we want. This is THE question. Do we want more and more wealth? How much is enough? Do we want to work now towards a clean, healthy, diverse planet for those who come after us? Forget global warming... Do we give a damn about the plant and animal species disappearing from the planet every day? Do we care about children dying, right now, 50 years after man walked on the moon, because they have no clean drinking water? What matters most to us as fathers, mothers, daughters and sons? As human beings?

We seem to suffer under a political system which alienates us, which perpetuates old divisions, which speaks of economy and not society and we rage against the small barriers we perceive may be placed in our way whilst ignoring the oppressive yoke which burdens so many on our small planet.

The "individualism" pursued through the curiously Protestant "Libertarian" agenda is tiny in focus and ambition. It seeks freedom to plunder the planet. educate and feed the chosen few and perpetuate wealth in its narrowest sense at an individual level. The grand projects worthy of energy and endeavour are shelved to keep the personal income high, find the pension and have good coffee behind the high walls.

I am not hungry. I'm not thirsty. I'm not cold. I am rich. But I am poor. We are rich. But we at scared. The fear is paralysingly us, making us myopic to an insane degree and we are all culpable by-standers, hands in our pockets, feeling our money, watching starving people die and watching the rape of a planet. We pretend we can't see it, can't change it and we pretend we're talking about what's important.

Comment #205 - Posted by: J1 at October 28, 2010 5:39 PM

Prolix #206,

Obama is half a beneficiary of Affirmative Action, and half a victim of it.

I can think of no example where the Federal government may, under the principles of Western Culture, treat a segment of free society collectively for rewards or punishments, benefits or costs. The 14th Amendment of the Constitution demands that all persons born or naturalized be treated alike under the law. In my mind, that explicitly prohibits Affirmative Action, for example. Unions must be treated like every other corporation. Men and women must be treated alike, minorities like the majority.

What the Federal government is doing to the economy is destroying it. That is not so much unsustainable as it is self-limiting.

Greed is an "excessive or rapacious desire, esp. for wealth or possessions." That is not to be confused with profit, which is a "pecuniary gain resulting from the employment of capital in any transaction", for example, or merely "advantage; benefit; gain". The Federal government may tax the latter under its Constitutional powers. It has no authority over greed, even to opine whether it exists. Obama's notion that income should be limited, and his establishment of a czar over compensation, are not authorized under the Constitution, and so such powers are restricted to the States.

In my model, the Federal income tax would apply only to businesses. This would put the Federal government in the business of maximizing corporate success, instead of dragging it down Obama style. It would give citizens freedom from the IRS.

What do you find false between my characterization of Marxism, on the one hand, and what you call Freedom and I call the American version of Western Culture, on the other?

What does "extreme market-oriented" mean? Should I assume that you mean that an exclusively market oriented view of economics is extreme? As to the libertarian view, I can find an abundance of claims for it, but, alas, no workable definition for it. When I've relied on the Libertarian Party's definition, the self-proclaimed libertarians I know object.

I support an exclusively free market economy, but I have to define free market to mean that an auction exists for functionally equivalent goods or services. Also contrary to what I think is the libertarian position, I believe that the Federal government, has an affirmative role to play in providing for and protecting markets and the national infrastructure. Both, however, should be limited to a strict derivation under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. States, though, are free to permit monopolies, or to let their roads and bridges rot, so long as they adhere to the Bill of Rights.

I also disgree with the liberarian view on war. We should, wherever possible wage war on foreign soil, not domestic. And in the military, I have no problem with treating men and women collectively.

The source of the economic hurt is not at all difficult to discern. You seem to want to keep the matter fuzzy so you can blame it on something. I suspect that would be capitalism, the source of wealth.

Comment #206 - Posted by: Jeff "drrocket" G. at October 28, 2010 6:49 PM

Jerry, #209, read this and reflect:


Would be interested to hear your thoughts.

Comment #207 - Posted by: Mel 37m/5'10"/175 at October 28, 2010 7:45 PM

Dr Rocket, let me draw your attention to real gdp growth under FDR.
1932: - 13.1%
1933: - 1.3% - New Deal takes effect
1934: +10.9
1935: +8.9
1936: +13.0
1937: +5.1
1938: -3.4
1939: +8.1
1940: +8.8
1941: +17.1
1942: +18.5

That's the effectiveness of the New Deal not the economy fixing it self by the magic of the market.


Comment #208 - Posted by: Steve at October 28, 2010 7:53 PM

Dr Rocket, let me draw your attention to real gdp growth under FDR.
1932: - 13.1%
1933: - 1.3% - New Deal takes effect
1934: +10.9
1935: +8.9
1936: +13.0
1937: +5.1
1938: -3.4
1939: +8.1
1940: +8.8
1941: +17.1
1942: +18.5

That's the effectiveness of the New Deal not the economy fixing it self by the magic of the market.

Comment #209 - Posted by: Strim at October 28, 2010 7:55 PM

Comment #213 - there are a number of problems with the analysis on that page. The most relevant point to this discussion is the claim that inflation of the 70s was not caused by the expansion of the monetary base but was caused by fiscal policy in the face of low productivity growth. Actually, govt spending was lower in the 70s than the 80s and productivity growth was higher in the 70s than the 80s. By his reasoning, inflation should have been higher in the 80s. However, it was lower because Volcker contracted the monetary base from 79-82 by raising interest rates. His analsysis would suggest that volcker's policy had nothing to do with it but instead it was caused by a increase in producitivity due to a tax cut (wishful thinking).

70s inflation was caused by an expansion of the monetary base and a supply shock (oil).

Comment #210 - Posted by: Jerry at October 28, 2010 8:13 PM


So how do we convince people that collective effort to solve the big problems through the aparatus of the state is both legitimate and desirable? I am a little pessimistic about this for two reasons: (i) the State racked up an atrociously violent record over the 20thC when it got involved in big enterprises, (ii) the size of the modern collective or society or polity (if I list enough examples perhaps I won't have to use a term to define the class and Jeff won't point out I have not defined my terms) is so large. I cannot remember whether it was Hume or Montesquieu who wrote about something like a mega-republic (I think it may have been called a "confederated republic" but won't look it up) and pointed out the many ways in which the virtues of the republican form (and I'll extend that for my purposes to liberal democratic form because both are participatory) would likely be corrupted if its size became too large, too alienating. So the individualist might say, "allow me to voluntarily associate with my fellows to clean up Lake Erie, do not pass laws requiring me to pay to clean up lake Erie, or to take extra precautions to avoid polluting it." I don't think this would work (historically it did not). And I don't see any way Lake Erie could be cleaned up without state coordination of collective action. In order for the state action to be legitimate, it must be the will of the elected representatives of the people. And I think this is where we have trouble today - there is a sense in which state action qua state action is perceived to be illegitimate regardless of the popular authority on which its actions are based. The reason for this is not just the propaganda of strict individualists, it is also because the state has messed a lot of things up and because it is often very very wasteful when it does things. As you point out, we feel alienated from our massive, impersonal, unresponsive governments....and so we alienate our governments, and in doing so we diminish our desire or the ability to coordinate collective action to solve shared problems....but these problems remain.


You are correct. My motive all along has been to blame the economic hurt on capitalism. When I was railing against cartoonish characterizations of social and economic problems I was fooling, I was trying to lull everyone into a fuzzy, kitty-puppy-dog sense of lalala so I could drop the big "Capitalism is to blame" on their heads.

Comment #211 - Posted by: Prolix at October 28, 2010 8:29 PM

Prole - exactly.

We are currently living in an alternative reality where the very state which is supposed to be "of, for and by" us, is seen as wholly alien, foreign and to be feared. Is this down to previous errors and abuse of power? Partly.

It's also down to the fact that the State is consistently under sustained and vicious attack from a media which is without responsibility or stake beyond short-term profit. Who would willingly go into modern politics? Who would ask their family to jump into that cauldron of bile? We're used to seeing politics ridiculed and attacked, and we're used to seeing it attract the sort of person you won't ever want to be.

It's also partly down to the frustrating interactions we've all had with the apparatus of state.....calling to solve a public-related issue at 5:01pm and no one answers the phone.

Mostly, it's down to our own limited focus and our own limited perception. We have allowed ourselves to become wholly obsessed with narrow measures of "progress" in the economic sense. We scream for year-on-year "growth" in our economies. Why? Any slip is perceived as catastrophic. Why? Economic progress is supposed to give us all the tools we need to achieve happiness, but the crazy pursuit of personal wealth and consumerism is in fact atomising society, making us unhappy and destroying our very home. There is no "off" button in our human psyche for acquiring more stuff or feeling "safer". This is our tragedy. We're partly self aware but are doing nothing to stop our own unhappy careering down a madly chosen path.

Laughably, the US, one of the powerhouses in this drive for economic nirvana parades its increasinbly right-wing morality every week in churches where people talk about Jesus as a personal friend.

Ultimately, I'm not always optimistic about solving the problems we face at a state level, because the nature of human beings at a collective level doesn't lend itself to big solutions. Within the small family units, or even small communities, we find it easy and sensible be kind, sensible and prudent. Elevate decisions to larger and larger groups, and we don't seem to be capable of sustaining a sensible approach. We become fearful, we depersonalise the "Other" and we make decisions accordingly. So we invade other countries, we pollute the seas and skies and we justify it all because our immediate families are "what's important". And this is hard-wired in us. We need power there to clean up the lake and to stop us losing biodiversity, but somehow, that power is always focussed on other things.

So I've got no easy answer as to how we take back the State and use it in a sensible manner. But I do know that the celebration of "individualism" and "libertarianism" so beloved of Crossfit is completely and wholly misguided. It supposes that the happiness, health and security of someone in California is wholly unconnected from the happiness, health and security of someone in Nigeria or Russia. And this isn't true. We are as wealthy and safe as the weakest members of our human tribe, wherever they are. This is true in a moral and a practical sense.

Comment #212 - Posted by: J1 at October 29, 2010 1:52 AM

Steve #214 and Strim #215,

Your table puts about as happy a face on the New Deal as possible. It's a bit of a sham, though.

Economists love to work with changes in data from period to period, as in quarterly changes in GDP as an indicator of recessions, and as in your table to reflect recovery. The objective reason not to do this is that it amplifies noise in the data. Your table also points out that relative changes are exaggerated when the base value gets small. In your example, GDP was down to $56B by 1933 ('33 dollars) so the percentage gains are large and noisy.

If you look at total GDP instead of its changes you'll find that the New Deal didn't bring GDP back to its 1929 level until 1939, when the US began its build up for WWII, or even later. The word depression refers to that deep, decade long dent in the total GDP curve. The New Deal emphasis was on fiscal policy, known variously as deficit spending, pump priming, or public works. Instead of creating a vital, wealth-producing private sector, FDR created a temporary, inadequate, bloated, wealth-consuming public sector. The unemployment rate went above 10% in 1931 and stayed there through 1940, rivaled in depth and duration only by Obama's Change.

The express purpose of Obama's massive (trillion dollar, unprecedented) spending was that it would halt the rise in unemployment. Instead, it raised the unemployment rate, rationalized by double talk about unmeasurable jobs saved. Meanwhile, the official unemployment statistic (incompletely reporting those not so discouraged as to stop seeking employment) stayed locked above 9.5%.

Comment #213 - Posted by: drrocket at October 29, 2010 9:36 AM

I'm rather amused to see all the negative comments and accusations of D'Souza not having any quality sources for his article and opinion. Yet, no one posted a differing perspective on how our President really thinks. Why...because he already told us in his book. His motivation has already been laid bare in black and white but all these supposed "infidel" members of our community just keep regurgitating the same politically correct delusions of "the holy one." Pathetic.

Comment #214 - Posted by: John m/34/175/3 yrs at October 29, 2010 10:28 AM


I agree, amusing and pathetic. Also ironic that their saviors policies destroy wealth and profit which contrary to the twisted perverted fears of left are the very conditions necessary to create the cleaner air/ environment, efficient vehicles, new technologies and higher living standards across the globe.

Comment #215 - Posted by: Victor at October 29, 2010 11:16 AM

John #220

See comment #163. There is a second one out there too, I think but I did not see it when I scanned through the list.

Comment #216 - Posted by: Andrew Wrenn at October 29, 2010 11:30 AM

Seriously WTF? Can we declare a nonpolitical zone here? Posting blatantly biased articles on the WOD of the day gies agaisnt the open source nature of this community. I adhere to the theory that political movements are inherently flawed, and so a new one comes up to oppose and correct the controlling movement. However since this one will be flawed as well then a new one will form to correct its flaws. Thus a cycle is born.

Comment #217 - Posted by: Daniel at October 29, 2010 4:02 PM

15 minute AMRAP:

10 jumping lunges
10 dips (4 rounds with ring dips
7 1/2 rounds with bar dips)
10 KB swings @ 53#

11 1/2 rounds

Comment #218 - Posted by: MNinKC at November 16, 2010 4:04 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?