did you know … instant noodles

 from the internet

 Instant noodle

Instant noodles have become quite popular in many countries around the world, including the United States.  Apart from being relatively cheap and widely available, they are also easily prepared.

The instant noodle was invented by Momofuku Ando of Nissin Foods in Japan and was launched in 1958 under the brand name Chikin Ramen. The product proved to be quite profitable, but in 1971 Nissin introduced Cup Noodles, a dried noodle block in a polystyrene cup – this was a new beginning.  However:

  • A single serving of instant noodles is high in carbohydrates and fat, but low in fiber, vitamins and minerals.
  • Instant noodles contain substances that reduce the body’s ability to absorb nutrients from healthy foods – affects the digestion process.
  • Typical cup-type instant noodles contain 2,700 mg of sodium and the maximum sodium intake per day should be 2,400 mg.
  • They are high in MSG (monosodium glutamate) which can trigger cancer.
  • Instant noodles contain anti-freeze such as propylene glycol – affects the liver, heart and kidneys.
  • Long term consumption can affect the body’s metabolism.
  • Instant noodles are a major cause of obesity.

Apart from these health risks, instant noodles are also low in nutritional value – certainly not the best food to prepare for yourself or your family.

Breast Cancer Awareness Month ~ is every month


U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA)

09/30/2014 11:20 AM EDT

FDA is exploring the future of breast cancer detection. Scientists at FDA are studying the next generation of screening and diagnostic devices, some of which borrow from the world of entertainment. In the future, those 3D images and displays may help doctors find hidden tumors and better diagnose cancers.

When democrats & conservatives interact

demsVrepub just joking

Black Democrats ~~~ Black Conservatives

So,  I wrote and posted something about voting rights and gratefully have had a lot of folks read it, retweet it, like it and leave messages.  I always thank people for even taking the time to visit my blog, let alone read my posts, written with emotion some have errors others strike an opinion others feel as well and while it started out as a petition that did not get much attention. I changed it into a personal rant …  I call them “just another rant,” received more attention good bad or ugly I have to say it is nice folks take the time to respond. So, when I received a challenge to my post, I responded in kind then found out that not only did this person have a  “Market based” attitude they were conservative and Black. I find that interesting and while I have had no problems with interacting with conservatives, some seem to feel that it’s assumed that “it” the “liberal attitude” about conservatism is based on a learned behavior or more often than not defensive and or nasty attitude. I don’t know you, so I cannot hate you or your political decision per se.   I voted for democrats for a reason and NOT the GOP which is wholly based on what they say, how they vote in Congress and do to women, people of colour , children, seniors while trying to take away or push low wages, no union access while eliminating worker and women’s rights … below is our writing interaction starting from the challenge to the last RE: Voting is a Right NOT a Privilege ~~ 50 yrs ~~ The Struggle continues


Them:  Sorry but I must respectfully disagree – contrasted with voter fraud which does likely exist in this country – waged by factions of both parties – obtaining a free ID card seems hardly the unreasonable task, or “race issue” (some make it out to be), especially in the modern age. Jim Crow laws were deplorable. Impeding any US citizen’s ability to vote is deplorable. But free ID cards available at one’s leisure do not equal the severe disadvantage brought about by “Jim Crow.”  At the very least, community outreach should be able to provide ID verification and cards, to those less able and who would otherwise not be able to obtain them (IE – the elderly, those in rural locations, or who have some other extreme limitation, etc).   I would think a system for resolving such issues – for “at need” individuals – could be devised without great difficulty; provided such accommodation was written into the law. As far as the rest of us “able-bodied-informed” city dwellers, if we can’t bother to make our way to some local hub, get our voter ID, and prove we are legal citizens on Election Day (same as we would to acquire public assistance – also a right) then maybe we shouldn’t vote. I don’t mean to be argumentative but there are many well meaning, respectable, organizations that would argue against assertions “voter fraud does not exist,” not to mention that lack of evidence does not prove a “negative” in this case. One does not need harbor ill will toward minorities to support bringing as much integrity to the system as possible.  And even so, comparing voter ID to Jim Crow (in my opinion) is a bit of a stretch.  Especially when juxtaposed any veracity these ID’s could (help) add to the system.


ME: Thank you for your visit and the response as well because lately the idea of being swept away for having a diff thought than the government is beyond my understanding … I didn’t go through ole’jim crow. I have a driver’s license/voter card but I can tell you ID’s are not free in every state and if you were born at home you could get purged from the rolls … I respect your opinion, we disagree. I know that where I live we, accepted water bills etc. and while it was not something we liked to do, provisional ballots offered. Though if you watched TV from 2008-2012 and lived in Republican districts, provisional ballots did not always get included so; your definition of voter fraud is different for me. I feel, have heard and believe voter fraud is about 1% if anything and the idea of voting twice feeding the box etc. gets a giggle out of me when clearly gerrymandering is legal voter fraud that needs to be looked at. I would like to know where people can get free ID cards because I would post that on the regular …please provide states and information! I used to consider where I live as uber liberal but then 8days of early voting got eliminated…souls to the polls and because we vote by mail some didn’t’ care but it was the principle of it all …the participation of the voting process. I think we all need to have the option to vote by mail…maybe online, in-person and stop the suppression but if you heard ..A whole lot of Republicans said … they do not want everyone voting… Brave People died for our right to vote yet SCOTUS2013 snipped Section5 out like it meant nothing and our Congress hasn’t voted to update the VRA yet while Redstates are trying to eliminating “Souls to the Polls”, early voting while narrowing down the hours available? I do not know if you have ever experienced discrimination racism or anyone telling you NO, because of how you look, your skin colour etc., but watching our elders be told sorry after decades of voting to suddenly not be able to is the New Jim Crow.  The problem is not how silly my entry is but how far will Republicans take this nonsense. I wanted to add that I did include civil rights, as prisons specifically private ones house mostly People of colour and the numbers are increasing, Stand Your Ground only seems to work for whites and drug laws seem to favor whites as well.  However, if you listen to mainstream media, most whites do meth etc. blacks crack but get more time on first time offenses and for smaller amounts found in their possession. In 2010 -2013 older men & women of colour were treated like as Republicans say “illegal immigrants,” and purged from voting rolls, some, after paying a lot of $$$ voted … poll tax. I can’t even begin to discuss how women of colour are treated , let alone Black women. It’s disgusting


Them: Yes, I cannot speak from experience as it regards “prejudice” the way you describe it.  And, I do appreciate you saying you respect my opinion.  Let me say I also respect yours. For this reason I am cautious to get too deep into political views here, since I fear we might unnecessarily clash.  Save to say, I can assure there are many districts throughout our country which misunderstand “conservatism” and what it means to represent. For me, personally, I believe market based solutions provide the best service and can meet (most) public needs – otherwise unnecessarily placed in the hands of the public sector.  I find Government tends to mismanage just about everything it’s involved in – implying somehow people can’t take care of themselves, while often creating poverty traps thru many of it’s subsidies.  It is also often wrought in fraud, and burdened by overzealous unions – somehow the main purpose becoming its very bureaucracy, at the expense of taxpayers – it often fails to provide “good service” to its people by lacking objectivity and the demands of a (responsible) profit margin (or budget). For this reason I tend to resent legislation which would further transfer power to the Federal government, and so lean Libertarian – a bit more conservative. On the other hand Republicans can annoy me getting bogged down by social issues in order to appease the far right.  So, it’s a mixed bag really.  Essentially both sides of the aisle are corrupt, and full of establishment types, and too often put party politics over the needs of the nation’s people. So, you just have to place your vote with the party you (currently) align with best (which for me is primarily about accountability, and the economy) – the wisdoms of Milton Friedman, etc (IE – these days I vote Republican). Unfortunately, the world we live in is hyper-partisan.  As such, both sides use inflammatory language to insight their base, which too often leaves those less informed with misconstrued notions about the “political process,” and consequently what (most) people (and the politicians who represent them) would actually intend (IE – I am a whole hearted believer Mr. Romney would have governed as a technocrat – honestly and honorably – however I can see how the 2012 campaign may have convinced many folks otherwise.) Nevertheless, in the end I believe we are (all) more similar than we are different… most of us just trying to get along.  Are experiences will affect our outlook, and therefore who we trust, and so it’s quite easy for politicians & their “fear mongers” to divide us – ironically enough, despite most of us wanting the same things, – what is best for each other’; regardless of race, gender, sexual preference, or ethnicity. We all want politicians who will represent us with fairly, and with honesty (which both sides seem to fail at miserably). As such, I think, whether rich or poor, whether black or white, liberal or conservative, if most of us want what is best for each other, then most of us also want what is best for our country – the main difference being how we hope to achieve it.  And so it is in this vein I believe (most) voter ID legislation comes to fruition.  However I would add, the idea that in some cases it gets used for the wrong reasons is (in my opinion) further proof voter fraud exists in this country – whatever “the form.”  And, we can be sure there are people on both sides of the aisle hoping to skew it. In which case, my referencing “free voter ID, provided with noble intent, and with community outreach for ‘at need’ individuals,” was more a way of saying I believe it is a worthy effort – if administered appropriately, and for the right reasons. In closing I will just say I believe there are very few conservatives in my opinion (IE – Republicans) who are really interested in holding back minorities – or obstructing anyone’s right to vote; at least no more than are liberals (who by the way have plenty of racists among them – unconscious or otherwise). If you you’re not familiar already them – I think David Webb, Dr. Ben Carson, Tim Scott, and Larry Elder all offer great fearless perspective in this regard; men who I respect very much and believe display great courage in the face of many (would be) liberal detractors (simply because they are black and conservative). Anyway, it sounds to me like you put a lot of thought into these issues which I commend.  This is what matters most – that you pay attention and cast your vote accordingly. Thank you for taking the time to respond to my comment.  I appreciate your cogent logic and open mindedness.  Before leaving I would like to recommend this presentation for you by Jonathon Haidt – http://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind Haidt is a Social Psychologist and Phd, who has done fascinating work – exploring people, our social groups, and what tends to drive our political moralities.  I hope you find it informative  ….  maybe even refreshing.  I would love to get your thoughts. Take care and God bless!


ME : I hope you might open up to the possibilities that privatization means no caps on cost, wild increases and less regulation, which led us to where we are now. The house of Bush spent taxpayer money like a drunken sailor with the government credit card that caused a financial collapse and a slow economy due to an incredible amount of obstruction in Congress.  I have much to say about government V privatization, I will not. We disagree. I do not believe in ruling with fear, lying like bush, fear mongering to GOTV or talking like Rep.SteveKing others to scare folks about people of colour. I think Romney would have had us in a war asap and that 47% comment was no joke or planned ,he was caught on tape.  I know most white folks are not nationalist’s/kkk’s or supremacists because I have common sense but after the many deaths of young black males and cases against black women I have to wonder how safe people of colour really are. I believe the fear mongering is working. I would not call myself a socialist but I do like FEMA, EMTs, Police etc. and would pay a smidge more to get better services. I am certain I nor my friends or neighbors could handle it all on our own, expect our kids to do it let alone go back to the days when women had 8+ kids to help get the work done. I do know of, have watched and listened to your list of conservative black men. Where is allen west or Michael steele? I do not agree with much of their policies. surprise!  I am not sure why but it seems like people just don’t realize people of colour are not a monolithic group, yes, walking, driving, shopping while Black( discrimination racism) are common experiences that will definitely gain significant supporters on both sides of the political aisle, other issues not so much.  I believe women should have equal pay for equal work and I am definitely pro-reproductive rights! I am and will always be offended by the likes of a Rep.PaulRyan and the GOP about race, income inequality, intelligence whether to rile the base or not, it is wrong.  Thanks for the visit


Them : Yes unfortunately many issues such as the Republican response to “Lilly Ledbetter” do get misunderstood – (in this case) that resistance from the right was more about some “effort of inequity” towards woman & minorities than it was “statute of limitations” – concerned with how it would play out in the court system thru trial lawyers.  Since it is fair to say, as is, our legal system is greatly overburdened with fraudulent lawsuits and the harms they bring. This of course seems trite in the face of demanding fair pay for (all) individuals, I would think.  However, it is not so much “this” element of the bill that caused so many Republicans to resist it, as it was the “process” by which the bill was brought to vote – having not gone thru committee; avoiding “regular order” – an unfortunate practice which both sides are often guilty of these last 20 years – in order to use legislation (at times, more so) as a “political tool,” than it is about law. IE – Reid and Pelosi ran the legislative branch in 2009 and did not allow the Ledbetter Act (meant to revise the Supreme Court’s 2007 finding) into committee. (You probably know this, and I don’t mean to imply you don’t) but committee allows both sides of the aisle to meet on a bill before it’s voted on, to hash out their differences – adding or striking amendments that may cause the other side to refuse it.  In the case of “Ledbetter,” Republicans would have argued for at least “some” kind of restriction on statute of limitations. Such practices are a perfect example of what I referred to earlier, about how politicians today unfairly divide Americans – thru “fear mongering”– putting Party politics above all else.  It is this same mechanism by which Reid refuses today to let anything go to a vote or thru committee, which might cause Democrats in red districts to take a stand – where it would put them at odds with their constituents.  Likewise, using similar (very cynical) politics, items may be brought to vote (before going to committee), in order to force Republican’s take a stand on something, and make them appear “unjust” in the eyes of voters. This is not to say these methods aren’t used by Republicans when they run things (as seen by their slow walking the budget committee, after last year’s sequester negotiation – incidentally a process ended by Paul Ryan collaborating with Patty Murray – Ryan an avid champion of “regular order,” and someone who I think was unfairly ridiculed for his vote on “Ledbetter” – but then that was one of the “more cynical” reasons for bringing Ledbetter to vote, the way it was).  As I said, establishment types on both sides, putting Party politics over the people. Therefore, what drives much of this behavior (like with Ledbetter), is an effort to create “political weapons,” to be used in campaigns – by denying “regular order” and making no effort at bi-partisan support.  Of course, the only winners in this process are politicians themselves – as they corrupt the system, fail the American people, and “fear monger” them (in this case, so it would appear Republicans reject “fair pay for women and minorities”). Again, these practices occur on both sides of the aisle.  I’m in no way attempting to malign Democrats over Republicans thru my explanation of it.  I simply mean to point out how politicians mislead the electorate – thru slide of hand tactics, and “supportive media sources” who rally their cause – leaving voters confused, and believing someone’s “out to get them.” In which case voters end up divided, pointing fingers at the other side, arguing with one another over what they believe is “ideology,” when it is more about “semantics.” Of course, there are large divides in ideology I realize – especially as it pertains to economics, union practice, mandatory spending/entitlements, tax policy, etc.  However, I would disagree that “civil rights and/or fair pay” are really a part of “the fight” in Washington, or for most Americans – only that our politicians (sadly) have made it seem this way (as they do with many issues). And so, we get campaigns like 2012 – believing somehow there is a “war on women” (as though women only vote according to gender), or that someone who believes the term “marriage” should be reserved for male/female union must be a “homophobe,” or those who prefer “compassionate welfare reform” do not care about minorities. This of course is all made worse by bomb throwers on either side (Mark Levin, Al Sharpton, and the like), often appearing as narrow-minded bigots, who make every effort to slander and antagonize anyone who disagrees with them (IE – the listener at home). As far as Bush, while I did disagree with much of his policy; the war, and overspending. It’s safe to say his budgets in no way rivaled that of President Obama (not even with the war).  As well, much of the policy (lack of regulation, etc – which may have played a part in the 2008 collapse) were the result of legislation carried over from the Clinton era (implemented and aided by Senate Democrats – and of course “Congressional obstructionism” during Bush would’ve resulted from Democrats). This is not to say Obama didn’t inherit a massive clusterf#@k when he took office, which has dictated much of his spending policy – however behaviors on Wall street, and the borrowing practices of many Americans (which primarily fueled the “derivates time bomb” that annihilated our economy), and all that followed it, can not fairly be laid just at the feet of Bush – as though, if not for him it would never have happened. Forgive me if I’ve overstepped here (in any way), regarding our political differences.  I would like to be cautious, since we might disagree on the approach in dealing with many of these issues – regarding spending, supply side economics, welfare reform, gut and amend legislative practice (the ACA), Obama’s leadership (or in many ways “lack thereof,” as I see it) – arguing timing, details, and approach, etc.  But I think this would mean arguing over views neither of us are likely to change any time soon.  Save to say, you have sound reason to vote your beliefs, and so do I – and neither wish any harm toward the other  To be honest I’d rather focus on how “politicians unfairly divide us,” and therefore our similarities, rather than how we differ.  I am big believer that much of what we see as “differences” (as stated earlier) are often more about “semantics” – driven by a lack of resolve and compromise in Washington, and not the (sometimes, seemingly implied) ill-will of the American electorate.  If we could fix this I think much of the rest would take care of itself. Speaking of similarities, I also think Steve King is an idiot   I also believe Public services have a role to play in police & fire, military, etc. (though I would argue FEMA should be reserved for “Katrina-like moments,” not any rich idiot who decides to build his home on beach front property – just another way government subsidies end up skewing markets at the expense of tax payers). Regarding black conservatives, I did not mention Alan West or Michael Steele only because I see Mr. Steele as a bit of RHINO, and find Mr. West too “macho” and opportunistic at times.  It’s not to say I don’t appreciate their accomplishments.  I just don’t find them quite the impressive role model (in my opinion) that the others represent. To this end, I’m not sure if you were implying that I see blacks as monolithic, or not (forgive me if misunderstood).  I don’t.  Rather, it is because (the extent of) diversity in African American political thought rarely gets attention in most “mainstream media forums” (unless being ridiculed), that I bring it up.  I didn’t mean to imply you are not aware that well-thought black conservatives have a place on the national stage; I just wish they received more attention aside from FOX. I will also add that my reference to racists among liberals was not necessarily directed (just) at the unfair criticisms sometimes made of black conservatives, but also at the “sanctimonious white liberals” who cry injustice, while enacting contradictory policy, or subtlety demeaning blacks and minorities in their everyday life. As example, Deblasio squashing NY charter schools for the sake of the Teacher’s union.  Or, this insight offered by Clarence Thomas last month – “My sadness is that we are probably today more race and difference-conscious than we were in the 1960s when I went to school. To my knowledge, I was the first black kid in Savannah, Georgia, to go to a white school. Rarely did the issue of race come up. Now, name a day it doesn’t come up. Differences in race, differences in sex, somebody doesn’t look at you right, somebody says something. Everybody is sensitive. If I had been as sensitive as that in the 1960s, I’d still be in Savannah. Every person in this room has endured a slight – every person – somebody has said something that has hurt their feelings or did something to them, or left them out. That’s a part of the deal, that’s life” He went on to say – “The worst I have been treated was by northern liberal elites. The absolute worst I have ever been treated. The worst things that have been done to me, the worst things that have been said about me, has been by northern liberal elites, not by the people of Savannah, Georgia.” But again I digress.  I tend to let myself get drawn into politics more than I like.  That said, I hope you don’t take anything I said the wrong way.  Nothing here was meant to be argumentative, just a hoping to point out some things we had yet to discuss. Speaking of which I hope you get a chance to check out that video I linked in the last comment.  It’s not some right wing talking point, I promise.  Just a human behavior study really, discussing the basic template for morality that humans seem to be born with (as Dr. Haidt puts it – harm/care, fairness/reciprocity, in group/loyalty, authority/respect, purity/sanctity) and how these things tend to effect our political outlook.  It’s not biased toward lib/consv in anyway.  Just a fun trip   Take care!


  ME: I disagree with you on most if not everything regarding republican/libertarian policies used in my opinion to keep Americans in place, specifically those in the middle or lower classes and REDSTATES taking away or pushing low wages, no union access and laws that short change people of colour, worker and women’s rights. Women make up 53% of the voter population and a considerable amount hold mostly low wage jobs paying .77 on a dollar … hardly trite. I am not going to say democrats are perfect but I vote for the democratic party for a reason. I think folks who want to be “Public Servants,” have to be better than the Michele Bachmann’s, Steve King Jeff Session Paul Ryan, the new GOP, for their votes& unseemly rhetoric about lazy inner city men, women, rape, SNAP,UI and kids just to name a few.   Yes, bills get “debated.” and will grant you the unfortunate truth that some complicit relationships let things slide into becoming law, such as the Monsanto bill with that ugly rider, but the filibuster has never been used as much as is today. How far can Americans get when the opposing party met the night Barack was sworn in, agreeing to be the Party of NO thinking they could make him a 1term Prez and be his waterloo? That is not the behavior or definition of a true Public Servant.    I will take a look, You take care too ..


Them:  Yes, I enjoyed our conversation..  if you ever want to share thoughts on that video I would be interested :) I’m sorry by “trite” I meant (what would seem) the “Republican argument,” if not for the manner in which the bill was handled; not going to committee. etc.  In fact my view is to the contrary – I believe fair pay is noble, and women should be paid at the same as men who hold an equivalent position. Some good info on why women tend to earn less, when viewed as broad-base statistic – http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/01/no-women-don-t-make-less-money-than-men.html


ME:  I don’t hate , we disagree and why is obvious … I cannot vote for lawmakers for Congress that do not have my best interest when they vote

Meet Republican Carly Fiorina

republogoMeet Republican Carly Fiorina of California: She’s anti-choice, anti-gay and she’s mocked climate change concerns as just being “worried about the weather.” And like so many other Republican candidates this year, she’s a multimillionaire corporate executive trying to buy her way into public office.

Now meet California’s Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer: She’s a progressive leader who’s spent her career fighting for everyday Americans against corporations, Wall Street lobbyists… and multimillionaire corporate executives like Carly Fiorina.

Senator Boxer stands up and leads in a U.S. Senate that needs progressive women.

Carly will stand up for corporations instead of people and she’ll do anything to win. That’s exactly why Carly Fiorina is writing million dollar checks to her own campaign. She wrote herself $2.5 million in January and then $1.1 million more in May. That’s a lot of money — and it makes Carly a formidable candidate who’s able to go negative and scare California voters.

But it’s also the backing of just one person… the world’s smallest fan club. So today, we’re going to help Barbara Boxer send California a message: 100,000 Americans stand strong with Barbara Boxer, while her opponent stands alone.

Contribute $3 to Barbara Boxer today and help her reach 100,000 donors

Senator Boxer is a strong woman with a record of leading progressive victories in the U.S. Senate and she can win again on Election Day. But she’s facing her toughest opponent yet in a year that the pundits claim will be a tough election for Democrats. So here’s the thing, if some Democrats lose this November, it’s never been more important for us to make sure progressive leaders like Barbara Boxer win.

We’re proving people matter more than money, so it doesn’t matter how much you contribute today. What matters is the message of support showing that everyday Americans contributing small amounts can beat back the power of multimillion dollar corporations and their lackeys who run for Congress.

Carly Fiorina’s support amounts to herself and her checkbook. Barbara Boxer has the support of over 100,000 Americans.

Let’s prove it — Contribute $3 to Barbara Boxer right now

Thank you for everything you do to make sure progressives win in 2010.


Charles Chamberlain, Political Director
Democracy for America

Democracy for America relies on you and the people-power of more than one million members to fund the grassroots organizing and training that delivers progressive change on the issues that matter. Please Contribute Today and support our mission.

Tell Shell: Stop shelling pit for climate disinformation

UCSLOGOShell says “We’re not aligning with skeptics.”

Tell Shell that actions speak louder than words: Stop funding the American Legislative Exchange Council’s attacks on climate science.