I have an immodest proposal to make.
In an effort to heal partisan wounds, and draw our conservative brethren into healthy dialogue, I propose the Burger for Bushies initiative! Identify a Republican and treat same to a Double Bacon Burger with cheese, a large order of fries, and a Coke.
Think of it as an investment in America’s future!
And they’re also talking about raising their own food and meat, canning and preserving their own, etc.–often for health reasons as well. I pretty much stayed away from the survivalists, I have little use for ammunition, but I still managed to get wonderful tips, recipes, and techniques for healthy food from obviously conservative sites. Like the one that talked about healthy food, and wearing a veil for modesty. 
Liberals talk about Health Food a lot, sure. But there are many conservatives that produce their own, which is healthy and good for the earth. They just don’t necessarily think of it in terms of Health Food.
BTW, Gadarene, it was the OP that mentioned Rainforest Crunch, not emarkp.
First of all, this has been said by some opponent of Clarence Thomas. Secondly, your post constitutes an endorsement of Ann Coulter, who accuses liberals of sometimes expressing a wish that certain conservatives be dead.
I think Apos hit the nail on the head. Conservatives tend to be religious. Liberals can be conned by crusades that take the place of religion. Environmentlism, pacifism, socialism, and health food all fall in this category. Belief in these things makes people feel superior and gives their lives purpose, just as religion does for religious people.
I have no problems with assigning moral implications to one’s actions, even one’s purchases. I do so myself. There are reasons I’m loathe to see Julia Roberts movies, and the fact that she’s a one-dimensional caricature of little real talent is only one of them. But since even you agree that many of the supposed implications associated with the liberal health food infatuation are “wacky”, I fail to see why I’m supposed to revere them and admire their moral fiber (no pun intended).
Jeff
I dunno, maybe you should check with gobear (who made the claim in the first place).
Oh, and proponents of actual food storage–a year’s worth or so–are often not focusing on the Apocalypse so much as possible local disasters, unemployment, and general preparedness for the unexpected. A ‘year’s worth’ can feed several neighbors for a month or so, as well as one unemployed family for a year. As an enthusiastic food storager, I know!
[smug mode] For example, just last week our town had an e. coli scare when local well tests came back positive. The store shelves were instantly emptied of bottled water, but thanks to my two week supply of drinking water in the garage, I didn’t need to worry a bit or even bother to boil water. The tests turned out to have been contaminated, and the city’s water is fine. [/smug mode]
I have no problems with assigning moral implications to one’s actions, even one’s purchases. I do so myself. There are reasons I’m loathe to see Julia Roberts movies, and the fact that she’s a one-dimensional caricature of little real talent is only one of them. But since even you agree that many of the supposed implications associated with the liberal health food infatuation are “wacky”, I fail to see why I’m supposed to revere them and admire their moral fiber (no pun intended).
Jeff
—But since even you agree that many of the supposed implications associated with the liberal health food infatuation are “wacky”, I fail to see why I’m supposed to revere them and admire their moral fiber (no pun intended).—
Because you DID seem to be ridiculing the idea of political and moral choices (which would be an abdication of moral agency, which is nothing to feel righteous about).
Nothing you said in any way criticized the particular values that these liberals held: instead you were ridiculing the idea of WHAT they were doing as being pathological. Indeed, you presented the method as something that marked a difference between liberals and conservatives. As I said, if so, then it certainly is not in the least to the credit of conservatives.
That we might disagree about some of the concepts behind their values is mostly immaterial: people have different values and beliefs, we already knew that. The point is at least they have some to begin with. Do you really think not buying Julia Roberts movies compares?
A couple of weeks ago. An undergrad that works in my lab stated that he eats beef daily in order to support beef producers. Its really not an unusual mindset in the more rural areas I’ve lived, or with anyone involved in food, and especially animal food product, production. Eat beef! Support ranchers! Stick it to the liberals that want the cows off rangeland!
It seems what this thread is lacking is a definition of what constitutes “health food.” To me, healthy eating means getting a decent amount of fresh vegetables, reducing my intake of saturated fats in favor of unsaturated fats, consuming fish and soy products weekly, and avoiding highly processed foods. The only organic food I buy regularly is milk, which tastes better and lasts longer than regular milk.
I hardly see how the above diet could be called a “fraud.” By health food does the OP mean foods marketed at whole foods stores, that are certified organic, or processed alternatives to “standard” foods, such as soy hotdogs, tofu icecream, and 456 varieties of herbs, pills and tinctures? I can’t say I know any liberals who aren’t smart enough to check the nutrition labels on any food they buy to determine whether it fits with the diet they aim to follow.
Whoops, apologies to you; your name was in my head because of the Pit thread. But it wasn’t gobear who initially made the claim in the first place (and Fresh Fields isn’t really a health store–more like a supermarket that sells healthy and/or organic and/or “liberal” food), it was tracer.
So how ‘bout it, trace? Don’t make me beaulieu over askin’ for a cite. (Sorry.)
Adolf Hitler was vegetarian and anti-tobacco.
If we’re going to lump supplements and herbal medicine in together with “health food”, it should be noted that conservative elements in Congress were a key force in blocking FDA regulation of herbs and supplements. Manufacturers of these products can stretch the law to make all sorts of goofy, unfounded claims, and we largely have the right wing to thank for this (on the grounds of protecting Americans’ right to be idiots without government interference).
So it’s hard to hold up conservatives as bastions of good sense when it comes to health matters.
And in response to something mentioned earlier, left-wingers may end up outliving right-wingers, but it probably won’t be because their fiber consumption significantly lowered their colon cancer risk (that link has been called into question in recent studies). They’ll just be taking larger, bulkier dumps (which is what we’ve seen on this board from time to time) 
Gadarene wrote, re whether Rainforest Crunch is sold in health food stores:
Trace? Beaulieu? That’s a joke, son! Ha! You kill you.
But seriously, folks:
Not only have I never seen Rainforest Crunch in a health food store, I have never seen Rainforest Crunch, period. :o In fact, when I wrote that in the OP, I was thinking that Rainforest Crunch was a brand of health-food cereal I’d seen.
However, I have seen these chocolate mint candies called “EnviroMints,” which come with a little card describing an endangered species. Some of the proceeds from the sale of EnviroMints go to benefit the World Wildlife Federation. And I’ll betcha dollars to certified-organic-donuts that these mints are sold in health food stores.
No “Enviro-Mints” in the Natural Foods store I manage. I’m not opposed to carrying such a product, however, providing the ingredients aren’t junk.
We do however, have a Rainforest Cereal. This particular product contains nuts and dried fruits purchased from rainforest countries. The idea is that by using ingredients from the rainforest, the people in the source area have an economic incentive to preserve and nurture the forests as opposed to cutting them down for cattle pasture and the like. Seems like a good idea to me.
No “Enviro-Mints” in the Natural Foods store I manage. I’m not opposed to carrying such a product, however, providing the ingredients aren’t junk.
We do however, have a Rainforest Cereal. This particular product contains nuts and dried fruits purchased from rainforest countries. The idea is that by using ingredients from the rainforest, the people in the source area have an economic incentive to preserve and nurture the forests as opposed to cutting them down for cattle pasture and the like. Seems like a good idea to me.
Oh come on, Biotop, who needs oxygen?
If it’s oxygen you’re worried about, why not have a nice heaping bowl of Plankton-Frosted Flakes? 
There is nothing wrong with this. However, note that it’s pretty much a symbolic act. In its fucus on symbolism, liberalism resembles religion.
Yep, them (National) Socialists are all alike.
On the other hand, Rosa Luxemburg liked nothing better than a big thick steak, medium rare.
It just goes to show you…something.
Yep, them (National) Socialists are all alike.
On the other hand, Rosa Luxemburg liked nothing better than a big thick steak, medium rare.
It just goes to show you…something.